IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction) THURSDAY, THE THIRTIETH DAY OF JULY TWO THOUSAND AND NINE PRESENT THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE V. ESWARAIAH AND THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE P. SWAROOP REDDY WRIT PETITION No.9519 OF 2000 Between: D. Santhamma, D/o Subrahmanya Sastry, Office of District Educational Officer, Chittoor District ..... PETITIONER AND 1 The Government of A.P., Rep by its Secretary General Administration Department, Secretariat Buildings, Hyderabad 2 The District Collector Chittoor District 3 The District Educational Officer Chittoor District .....RESPONDENT(S) Petition under Article 226 of the constitution of India praying that in the circumstances stated in the Affidavit filed herein the High Court will be pleased to to pass orders, particularly one in the nature of Writ of Mandamus declaring the Judgement of the A.P. Administrative Tribunal in O.A. No. 3263 of 1993, and M.A. No. 413 of 2000 dt. 11/4/2000 and the 1st Respondent Memo No. 1167/Services.A/92-1, dt. 14/6/1993 and the consequential orders in Rc. No. 16393/A4/92, dt. 30/5/2000 as arbitary, illegal caprecious misleading contrary to the scheme under G.O. Ms. No. 612, General Administration Department dt. 30/10/1991 violative of Articles 14, 16 and 21 of teh Constitution of India and the principkles of natural justice and consequently set-aside the impugned order and direct the respondents to continue the services of the petitioner, and pay her increments and revised scales allowed from time to time and grant such other relief as this Hon'ble High Court may deem fit and proper. Counsel for the Petitioner : MR.KASAJAGANMOHAN REDDY Counsel for the Respondent No.: GP FOR GENERAL ADMINISTRATION The Court made the following : ORDER: (Per Hon’ble Sri Justice P. Swaroop Reddy) Learned counsel for the petitioner reporting that the petitioner is no more, seeks time for taking steps to bring the legal representatives of the petitioner on record. 2. But, a perusal of the affidavit filed in support of the writ petition reveals that the petitioner is a spinster and her appointment in the office of respondent No.3 was on compassionate grounds after the death of her widowed sister, for looking after her two minor children. 3. In the circumstances, the Writ Petition is liable to be dismissed as abated and is accordingly dismissed. No order as to costs. ____________________ V. ESWARAIAH, J July 30, 2009. ____________________ P. SWAROOP REDDY, J PV/IVD