IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction) FRIDAY, THE SIXTH DAY OF FEBRUARY TWO THOUSAND AND NINE PRESENT THE HON'BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE AND THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE RAMESH RANGANATHAN Writ Petition No. 1468 of 2009 Between: 1) Illuru Krisnhna Reddy S/o. Pulla Reddy R/o. Kallamalla Village, Yerraguntla Mandal, Kadapa District. 2) V. Krishnaiah S/o. V. Peddanna R/o. Kallamalla Village, Yerraguntla Mandal, Kadapa District. 3) Dantham Subbaramaiah S/o. Bala Subbanna R/o. Kallamalla Village, Yerraguntla Mandal, Kadapa District. ... PETITIONERS AND 1) The A.P. Power Generation Corporation Ltd., Vidyut Soudha, Somajiguda, Hyderabad, Rep. by its Managing Director. 2) The Chief General Manager (Admn) APGENCO Ltd., Vidyut Soudha, Somajiguda, Hyderabad. 3) The Chief Engineer (O & M) Rayalaseema Thermal Power Project, VV Reddy Nagar, Kallamalla (Village) Yerraguntla Mandal, Kadapa District. 4) The Director (HR) APGENCO Ltd., Vidyut Soudha, Somajiguda, Hyderabad. 5) The District Collector, Kadapa District, Kadapa. ...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 a writ order or direction more particularly one in the nature of writ of Mandamus declaring the impugned the action of the respondents in proposing to appoint 229 posts without following due procedure and also without framing guidelines besides not giving preference to the candidates from Kallamalla Village, as illegal, and arbitrary and consequently direct the respondents to give 50% preference to the candidates belonging to Kallamalla Village in the proposed appointment of 229 posts into the Rayalaseema Thermal Power Project. Counsel for the Petitioners: MR.Y.RAMA RAO Counsel for Respondent Nos.1 to 4: MR.K.CHIDAMBARAM(SC FOR AP GENCO) Counsel for Respondent No.5: GP FOR REVENUE The Court made the following: Oral Order: (Per Shri Anil R. Dave, Chief Justice) 1. This is a public interest litigation wherein the petitioners, who are residents of Village Kallamalla, have approached this Court with a prayer that respondent Nos.1 to 4 be directed to appoint residents of the said village to different posts in a project, which is being established near that village. 2. The learned advocate appearing for the petitioners has submitted that some of the persons, who have applied for different posts, had worked as contract labour under the afore-stated respondents for sometime and they are qualified to be appointed to different posts, which have been advertised by the concerned respondents. 3. It is the case of the petitioners that residents of Village Kallamalla should be given priority in the matter of giving appointment to different posts. 4. On the other hand, learned Standing Counsel for respondent No.1 has submitted that the entire matter with regard to giving weightage to the residents of Village Kallamalla is under active consideration of the respondent authorities. It has been submitted that a representation, which has been annexed as Ex.P.1 at page 12 of the writ petition, has also been received and the said representation shall also be considered while taking final decision in the matter. 5. In view of the fact that the representation made by the residents of Village Kallamalla is under consideration of the concerned respondent authorities, we are sure that the said authorities will consider the same in accordance with law as soon as possible, preferably within a period of four weeks from today, and take appropriate decision in the matter. 6. In view of the above facts, in our opinion, the petition does not survive and the same is disposed of accordingly. ANIL R. DAVE, CJ February 06, 2009 RAMESH RANGANATHAN, J svs ..... REGISTRAR // TRUE COPY // SECTION OFFICER To 1) 2 CD copies Form-NIC-OGS/WP{VSMI}