IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction) FRIDAY, THE TWENTY EIGHTH DAY OF MARCH TWO THOUSAND AND EIGHT PRESENT THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE L.NARASIMHA REDDY WRIT PETITION No. 25318 of 2002 Between: W. Giridhara Rao s/o late W. Nageswara Rao R/o Flat No. 301, 3rd Floor Sri Santha Complex, D. No. 48-8-20, Sri Nagar Dwaraka Nagar, Visakhapatnam ..... PETITIONER AND 1 the Executive Director (P)and Disciplinary Authority life insurance Corporation of India, Central Office, Yogakshema Jeevan Bhima Marg P.B. NO. 19953 Mumbai-400 021. 2 Sri R.S.R. Murthy Manager AAA(NB) cum Enquiry Officer, Life Insurance Corporation of India Divisional Office, 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 an appropriate Writ or order or direction more particularly one in the nature of writ of mandamus declare the action of the 2nd respondent in conducting the disciplinary proceedings against the petitioner pursuant tot he Charge sheet dated 16-09-2002 issued by the 1st respondent under Regulation 39 of LIC of India (Staff) Regulation, 1960 as illegal, arbitrary mala fide, without application of mind, violative of principles of natural justice and set side the same. Counsel for the Petitioner : MR.K.SRINIVASA RAO Counsel for the Respondents: MR.D.V.SITARAMAMURTHY The Court made the following ORDER: Disciplinary proceedings were initiated against the petitioner, through a charge sheet, dated 16.09.2002, under Regulation 39 of the Life Insurance Corporation of India (Staff) Regulations, 1960. The petitioner challenges the charge sheet on several grounds. It is urged that the charges are vague and that the disciplinary proceedings cannot be permitted to go on, even while the proceedings before the criminal Court are pending. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned counsel for the respondents. After the writ petition was filed, several developments have taken place. This Court granted interim stay and the respondents filed an application to vacate the interim order. While making the interim order absolute, this Court left it open to the respondents to alter the charge. Accordingly, a fresh charge sheet was issued. Thereby, the very basis of the writ petition ceases. Further, the Special Judge for C.B.I. and S.P.E. Cases, Visakhapatnam had rendered the judgment convicting the petitioner. When the respondents tried to proceed with the departmental enquiry, the petitioner filed another writ petition objecting the progress in the disciplinary proceedings. This Court dismissed the said writ petition. Under these circumstances, nothing remains to be decided in this writ petition. The writ petition is, accordingly, dismissed. There shall be no order as to costs. ______________ 28.03.2008 kdl ..... REGISTRAR // TRUE COPY // SECTION OFFICER To 1.2CCs to 2.2CD copies Form-NIC-OGS/WP{VVS}