IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction) FRIDAY, THE NINETEENTH DAY OF DECEMBER TWO THOUSAND AND EIGHT PRESENT THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE N.V. RAMANA WRIT PETITION NO : 26919 of 2008 Between: Vanka Rajulu S/o.Late Appala Swamy Visakhapatnam R/o.B-98,Sambamurthy Port Quarters Kancherapalem ,Visakhapatnam ..... PETITIONER AND 1 The Chairman,Visakhapatnam Port Trust Visakhapatnam 2 The Chief Engineer, Visakhapatnam Port Trust Visakhapatnam .....RESPONDENTS 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 issue a writ or direction or order or orders more particularly one in the nature of writ of mandamus declaring the inaction of the 2nd respondent not reinstating the petitioner into service in spite of that he proved his innocence in the Apex Court of India which is illegal, arbitrary, unconstitutional and against the principles of natural justice consequently direct the respondents to reinstate the petitioner into service with all consequential benefits keeping in view of the order of the Supreme Court of India vide S.L.P.(Crl) No.2766/2008 dated 19.9.2008. Counsel for the Petitioner:MR.KARRI SURYANARAYANA Counsel for the Respondents: MR.K.SRINIVASA MURTHY The Court made the following : ORDER: The petitioner filed the present Writ Petition questioning the action of the second respondent in not reinstating the petitioner into service, in spite of Special Leave to Appeal (Crl.) No.2766 of 2008 on 19.09.2008 being allowed by the Supreme Court. The petitioner is appointed as Checker in the second respondent-Port Trust on 01.02.1972. While so, he was suspended from service on 05.04.2002, on the ground that there were criminal proceedings against him. In the criminal proceedings, the petitioner was sentenced to undergo imprisonment for one year and a fine of Rs.500/- was imposed, by the II Metropolitan Magistrate, Visakhapatnam. After availing the remedies of appeal before the Sessions Court, Visakhapatnam and revision before this Court, the petitioner approached the Supreme Court by way of a Special Leave to Appeal (Crl.)No.2766 of 2008, which was allowed on 19.09.2008. Pursuant to the said order, he submitted a representation, dated 15.10.2008, before the respondents to reinstate him into service, as he was acquitted in the criminal proceedings. The grievance of the petitioner is that no action has been taken thereon, so far. Hence, this Writ Petition. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned Standing Counsel for the respondents. Learned counsel for petitioner submitted that since the representation submitted by the petitioner is pending consideration, the writ petition may be disposed of directing expeditious disposal of the said representation. Learned Standing Counsel for the respondents also agreed for the same. Hence, in view of agreed stand of both the learned counsel, I deem it appropriate to dispose of the writ petition directing the respondents to consider and dispose of the representation, dated 15.10.2008, of the petitioner, in accordance with law, expeditiously, preferably within a period of six weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. The Writ Petition is accordingly disposed of. No costs. _____________ N.V.RAMANA, J. Dated:19.12.2008 GJ