IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD FRIDAY, THE FOURTEENTH DAY OF NOVEMBER TWO THOUSAND AND EIGHT PRESENT HON'BLE SRI ANIL R. DAVE, THE CHIEF JUSTICE And HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE R.SUBHASH REDDY WRIT APPEAL NO : 1430 of 2008 (Writ Appeal under Clause 15 of the Letters Patent against the Order dated 18/06/2008 in WP NO : 12454 OF 2008 on the file of the High Court.) Between: 1 The Deputy Inspector General, Central Industrial Security Force, South Zone, Head Quarters, Besant Nagar, Chennai. 2 The Deputy Commandant, Central Industrial Security Force, BDL., Bhanur, Medak District. ..... APPELLANTS AND K. Mashanna S/o. K. Sayanna, Bhanur, Medak District. .....RESPONDENT Counsel for the Appellants :MR.A.RAJASHEKAR REDDY (ASST SOLICITOR GEN) Counsel for the Respondent : MR.B.SHIVA KUMAR The Court made the following : JUDGMENT : (Per Hon’ble Sri Anil R.Dave, CJ) Admit. At the request of the learned advocates appearing for the parties, the appeal is finally heard today. Being aggrieved by the order dated 18th June 2008, passed in writ petition No.12454 of 2008, this appeal has been ﬁled by the appellants-the Deputy Inspector General and the Deputy Commandant, CISF South Zone and others. The respondent, at the relevant time, was working in the cadre of Head Constable. He was transferred from CISF Unit, BDL, Bhanur, Medak District, to Port Trust, Chennai. Being aggrieved by the said order, the aforesaid writ petition was ﬁled. The petition has been allowed and the learned single Judge has directed the appellants to give posting to the respondent at any station in his home zone. Learned Assistant Solicitor General Sri A.Rajasekhar Reddy, appearing for the appellants, has submitted that during the entire service tenure of the respondent, for more than 50% of time, he was accommodated in his home zone. It has been submitted that respondent is to retire on 30th April 2012. Thus, still there are more than three years to retire for the respondent, and, therefore, provision with regard to giving posting to the concerned CISF personnel in or near home District as incorporated in Clause 11 of Circular No.1/2008, would not apply. It has been submitted that the said circular is to apply only in last three years, and that too, as stated in Clause 11, “as far as possible, no CISF……”. So, it has been submitted by him that provisions of the said Clause ought not to have been resorted to by the learned single Judge. It is pertinent to note in the instant case that after the aforesaid impugned order was passed in the writ petition, the respondent was promoted to the post of ASI and he was re-posted in Chennai. The respondent, thereafter, ﬁled another petition being writ petition No.23031 of 2008, which has also been allowed on 21st of October 2008. By virtue of the order passed in the said writ petition, it has been directed that the appellants should re-consider the case of the respondent for accommodating him at BDL, Bhanur, or at any other place near Hyderabad City. The aforesaid order has not been challenged so far. It has been submitted by the learned Assistant Solicitor General appearing for the appellants that the said order is also to be challenged, but still, the appellants have not received the certiﬁed copy of the said order. In view of the aforesaid admitted facts, in our opinion, the present appeal has become infructuous, because, after the impugned order was passed, the respondent has been promoted and he has been given posting in a different cadre. In the circumstances, we do not interfere with the impugned order in view of the fact that the appellants have to comply with the order, dated 21 st October 2008, passed in writ petition No.23031 of 2008. In view of the above development in the matter, the appeal stands disposed of as infructuous. _________________ ANIL R. DAVE, CJ 14th November 2008 ______________________ R. SUBHASH REDDY, J ajr