IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction) MONDAY, THE THIRD DAY OF MARCH TWO THOUSAND AND EIGHT PRESENT THE HON'BLE MRS JUSTICE T.MEENA KUMARI AND THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE G.CHANDRAIAH WRIT PETITION NO : 539 of 2008 Between: S. Venkata Sastry S/o S.V. Jogeswara Rao Civil Supplies Department Hyderabad. ..... PETITIONER AND 1 Mr. S.P. Singh Principal Secretary to Government, Municipal Admn. Dept., Secretariat, Hyderabad-22. 2 Mr. Bhanwal Lal, S/o Mr. Bhajrang Lal. Prl. Secretary to Government Labour Lamp & Ind. dept Secretariat, Hyderabad-22. 3 commissioner of civil Supples, C.S. Bhavan, Somajiguda, Hyderabad. 4 Sri K. Kamalakar, REtd. Addl. Director, Civil Supplies Department, Hyderabad C/o Commissioner of Civil Supplies, Civil Supplies Bhavan, Somajiguda, Hyderabad. .....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 Writ order or direction more particularly one in the nature of Writ of mandamus under Article 226 of the Constitution of India calling for the records relating to CA No.65/2003 on the file of the Hon'ble APAT and that of the Commissioner, Civil Supplies relating to his affidavit dated 01-07- 2004 in his ref. No. 2790/CS-Ii/A2/2002 declaring that the action of the 1st and 2nd respondents in not having implemented the orders of the Hon'ble APAT dated 31-07-2002 in O.A. No. 6833/95 and 6230/96 as illegal, arbitrary, unjust and malafide and consequently direct the respondent No.3 to issue orders promoting the petitioner as Dy. Director Grade-I w.ef. 05-06-1987 and as Addl. Director W.e.f. 13-03-1996 on par with his Junior, the 4th respondent herein, with all consequential benefits and exemplary costs from respondents 1 and 2 with interest on delayed payments of consequential benefits at the earliest and pass such other order or orders deemed fit and just. Counsel for the Petitioner:MR.P.RAMABRAHMAM Counsel for the Respondent No.: GP FOR SERVICES I The Court made the following : ORAL ORDER: (per THE HON’BLE MRS. JUSTICE T.MEENA KUMARI) Seeking a writ of mandamus calling for the records relating to the order in CA No. 65 of 2003 and that of the Commissioner, Civil Supplies relating to his affidavit dated 1.7.2004 in his reference No.2790/CS-II/A2/2002 declaring the action of the respondents 1 and 2 in not implementing the order, dated 31.07.2002 passed in O.A. Nos. 6833 of 1995 and 6230 of 1996 by the Andhra Pradesh Administrative Tribunal, Hyderabad, as illegal and arbitrary and consequently to direct the third respondent to issue orders promoting the petitioner as Deputy Director Grade – I with effect from 5.6.1987 and as Additional Director with effect from 13.3.1996 on part with his junior i.e. 4th respondent herein with all consequential benefits, the petitioner filed this writ petition. The petitioner herein filed the above Original Applications aggrieved by the denial of his claim for promotion as Additional Director of Civil Supplies in Civil Supplies Department, with effect from 13.3.1996. The Tribunal, on hearing both sides and on extensive consideration of the rival contentions, disposed of both the O.As. by a common order dated 31.07.2002 directing the respondents to examine and regularise the services of the petitioner and the unofficial respondent i.e. the 4th respondent herein in category – II and review the promotions of the petitioner and the 4th respondent from category – II to Category – I and conduct consequent review of the promotions in pursuance of the upgraded post of Additional Director. It is the case of the petitioner that since the respondents have not complied with the order, dated 31.07.2002, passed by the Tribunal, he filed Contempt Application No. 65 of 2003 in O.A. No. 6833 of 1995. Consequent to the filing of the above Contempt Application, the respondent herein filed Review Petition before the Tribunal, which was, however, dismissed by the Tribunal. Thereafter, the Respondents herein filed Writ Petition No. 11340 of 2004 against OA No. 6833 of 1995 and WP No. 11616 of 2004 against the OA No. 6230 of 1996 and by order dated 31.7.2002 made in WP MP No. 74774 of 2004 in WP No. 11616 of 2004, this court granted interim suspension of the order dated 31.7.2002 passed by the Tribunal. Consequently, the Tribunal closed the Contempt Application on 12.7.2004 pursuant to the order passed by this court dated 6.7.2004 in WP MP NO. 74774 of 2004 in WP No. 11616 of 2004. Hence, the present writ petition. It is not in dispute that OA Nos. 6833 of 1995 and OA No. 6230 of 1995, filed by the petitioner, were disposed of by a common order dated 31.7.2002 and after dismissal of the review petition filed by the respondents herein, they filed WP No. 11616 of 2004 against the order in OA No. 6230 of 1996. Along with the Writ Petition, the respondents also filed WP MP No. 14774 of 2004 seeking interim suspension and a Division Bench of this Court by order dated 6.7.2004 granted interim suspension. Pursuant to this order, the Tribunal closed the Contempt Application No. 65 of 2003 on 12.7.2004 as the matter is seized by this court. Admittedly, the Writ Petition No. 11616 of 2004 is pending. The Tribunal after elaborate analysis of the events, in our considered view, has rightly closed the Contempt Application. Having gone through the impugned order and in the facts and circumstances of the case, we do not see any illegality in the impugned order. Consequently, the writ petition fails and is accordingly dismissed at the stage of admission. No order as to costs. ____________________ T.MEENA KUMARI, J. __________________ G.CHANDRAIAH, J. March 3, 2008 MAS.