IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction) THURSDAY, THE TWENTY SECOND DAY OF OCTOBER TWO THOUSAND AND NINE PRESENT THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE B.PRAKASH RAO and THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE G.BHAVANI PRASAD WRIT PETITION NO : 17838 and 17966 of 2000 Between: ..... PETITIONER AND .....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 Counsel for the Petitioner:GP FOR SERVICES I Counsel for the Respondent No.: MR.J.SUDHEER The Court made the following : THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE B.PRAKASH RAO and THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE G.BHAVANI PRASAD WRIT PETITION NO : 17838 and 17966 of 2000 ORAL ORDER: (Per BPR,J) Heard the learned Additional Advocate General for the petitioners and learned counsel for the respondents herein. Since the common questions arise in these two matters and also the impugned orders of the A.P. Administrative Tribunal being a common one, therefore taken up together for disposal. In these two writ petitions the petitioners is the State, who seeks to assail the orders passed in O A No. 1149 of 1998 dated 26.11.1999 on the file of the A P Administrative Tribunal where the applications filed by the respondents herein under Section 19 of the Administrative Tribunals Act, 1985 seeking direction to fill up all the existing posts of S.G.T (Urdu Medium) as per the notification dated 28.5.1997 and appoint them as teachers. The Tribunal after contest, took up all the batch of matters and disposed of the same with directions to consider the applicants/respondents herein case within a period of three months. Admittedly, the respondents herein are the wait list candidates and said period of three months from the date of the orders of the Tribunal would expired in February, 2000, though this Court granted interim suspension of the said orders on 21.09.2000, however it emerges that even if their cases are considered and appointed they should have any grievance at- all, even otherwise, if their cases remain unconsidered, yet it is always open for the respondents herein to apply once again in the fresh notification issued and further if there is any refusal, it would amount to fresh cause of action for filing a fresh application before the A P Administrative Tribunal. In the above circumstances, nothing survives for consideration in the present writ petitions and the matter has become infructuous. Accordingly the writ petitions are dismissed. No costs. _______________ B.PRAKASH RAO,J _________________ G.BHAVANI PRASAD,J DATE:22.10.2009 tvk THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE B.PRAKASH RAO and THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE G.BHAVANI PRASAD WRIT PETITION NO : 17838 and 17966 of 2000 Date: 22.10.2009