IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction) TUESDAY, THE SIXTEENTH DAY OF JUNE TWO THOUSAND AND NINE PRESENT THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE GOPALA KRISHNA TAMADA WRIT PETITION NO : 17919 of 1999 Between: Smt. Farhatunnisa Begum W/o. Late Md.Fiazuddin, R/o.20-2-844, Hussaini Alam, Hyderabad. ..... PETITIONER AND 1 Government of Andhra Pradesh, Rep. by its Secretary, Housing and Municipal Administration Department, A.P.Secretariat, Hyderabad. 2 Hyderabad Metropolitan Water Supply & Sewerage Board, Rep. by its Managing Director, Khairatabad, Hyderabad. 3 Hyderabad Metropolitan Water Supply & Sewerage Board, Rep. by its Chief General Manager (P&A) Khairatabad, 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 to call for the records from 2nd and 3rd respondents and issue an appropriate Writ, Order or Direction, particularly one in the nature of Writ of Mandamus, declaring that the orders passed by 2nd respondent in Show Cause Notice No.S1/431/1999, dt:13-4-1999 (not served) in terminating services of petitioner as Officer (P&A) and the consequent Memo passed by 3rd respondent in No.S1/431/1999, dt:28-7-1999 as arbitrary, illegal, unjust, contrary to law, without conducting any enquiry, in violation of principles of natural justice, unfair, contrary to the Rules and also in violation of Art.14 & 21 of the Constitution of India; and grant all consequential benefits; and pass such other order or orders as are deemed fit and proper in the circumstances of the case. Counsel for the Petitioner:MR.A.K.JAYAPRAKASH RAO Counsel for the Respondent No.: MR.V.SUDHAKAR REDDY The Court made the following : ORDER: The petitioner filed this Writ Petition under Article 226 of Constitution of India, seeking to issue a writ of Mandamus declaring that order passed by respondent No.2 in show cause notice No.S1/431/1999, dated 13.04.1999 in terminating services of petitioner as officer (P&A) and the consequent memo passed by respondent No.3 in No.S1/431/99, dt.28.07.1999 as arbitrary, illegal and unjust. 2. When the matter is taken up for hearing, Sri A.K.Jaya Prakash Rao, the learned counsel for the petitioner states that he has no instructions in the matter. 3. In the light of the said submission, this court is of the view that this writ petition has become infructuous. 4. Accordingly, this Writ Petition is dismissed as infructuous. _________________________ GOPALA KRISHNA TAMADA, J Dated June 16, 2009 KSH