IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction) TUESDAY, THE SIXTH DAY OF JUNE TWO THOUSAND AND NINE PRESENT THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE NOOTY RAMAMOHANA RAO WRIT PETITION No. 28971 of 2008 Between: P. Pavan Kumar S/o. P. Satyanarayana H.NO.9-9-47, Ramnagar, Karimnagar, Karimnagar District. ..... PETITIONER AND 1 The Assistant General Manager, State Bank of Hyderabad, Regional Office, Ambedkar Road, Karimnagar, Karimnagar District. 2 The District Employment Officer, District Employment Exchange, Karimnagar, Karimnagar District. .....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 to issue a writ, order or orders more particularly one in the nature of Writ of Mandamus to declaring the action of the respondent No.1 in not allowing the petitioner to appear for interview for selection and appointment to the post of Safai- Karmachari-cum-water boy/ peon as illegal, arbitrary and contrary to the Judgment of the Hon'ble Supreme Court of India reported in 1996(6) Scale 676 and consequently direct the 1st respondent to consider the case of the petitioner for selection and appointment to the said post without insisting that the name of the petitioner should be sponsored by the Employment Exchange and pass Counsel for the Petitioner:MR.CH.JAGANNADHA RAO Counsel for the Respondent No.: GP FOR EMPLOYMENT & TRAINING THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE NOOTY RAMAMOHANA RAO WRIT PETITION No. 28971 of 2008 ORDER: It is represented by the learned counsel appearing for the opposite party that when the selection process has been undertaken by the respondent-bank, the case of the writ petitioner was also considered and he has also been subjected to the process of interview. In view of this statement, which is not contradicted by the learned counsel for the petitioner, no further orders are needed to be passed in the writ petition. The respondent-bank will finalise the selections, if not already done, as expeditiously as is possible. The writ petition is accordingly dismissed. No order as to costs. NOOTY RAMAMOHANA RAO,J Dt:09.06.2009 usd