IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction) THURSDAY, THE TWENTY THIRD DAY OF JULY TWO THOUSAND AND NINE PRESENT THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE GOPALA KRISHNA TAMADA WRIT PETITION NO : 9965 of 1999 Between: V.Siva Shankar Rao S/o Venkata Narayana Rao Secunderabad Divisional Office of L.I.C. of India, Secunderabad, R/o Secunderabad. ..... PETITIONER AND 1 The Senior Divisional Manager Hyderabad Divisional Officer, Life Insurance Corporation of India, Secrtariat Road, Hyderabad. 2 The Senior Divisional Manager, Secunderabad Divisional Office, Life Insurance Corporation of India, Secunderabad. .....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 issue a Writ, order or direction particularly one in the nature of Writ of Mandamus declaring the action of the Respondents in conforming the petitioner in service as Watchman from 4-6-1994 instead of from 19-5-1991 as arbitrary, unjust and descriminatory and violative Articles 14 and 16 of constitutional of India and Consequently direct the Second Respondent to regularise petitioner services from 19-11-90 and confirm the petitioner as Watchman from 19-5-91 by taking int consideration his services as temporary watchman with restrospective effect fom 19-11-91 with all consequential benefits including seniority, grant of increments and other servide benefits as ex-service man and pass such other order or orders as this Hon'ble court deems fit and proper in the circumstances of the case. Counsel for the Petitioner:MR.A.BICHAIAH Counsel for the Respondent No.: MR.M.V.SURESH The Court made the following : ORDER : This Writ Petition is filed by petitioner under Article 226 of the Constitution of India seeking a writ of Mandamus to declare the action of the respondents in confirming the petitioner in service as watchman from 04.06.1994 instead of from 19.05.1991 as arbitrary and consequently direct respondent No.2 to regularize the petitioner services from 19.11.1990. 2. As there was no representation for the petitioner on 19-06-2009, the matter was directed to be listed under the caption ‘for dismissal’. In spite of the matter being listed under the caption for dismissal, today also there is no representation for the petitioner. 3. Therefore, this Writ Petition is dismissed for default. There shall be no order as to costs. _________________________ GOPALA KRISHNA TAMADA, J July 23, 2009 KSH