IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction) THURSDAY, THE FOURTH DAY OF NOVEMBER TWO THOUSAND AND FOUR PRESENT THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE G. BIKSHAPATHY WRIT PETITION NO : 16864 of 1994 Between: 1 B. Maruthi S/o Hanumappa R/o Sangama farm Village, Bodhan (Mandal) Nizamabad District. 2 K. Saibabu S/o. K. Venkateswarlu R/o. Chandna (Post) Musra (Via) Nizamabad District. 3 Bandla Srinivasa Rao S/o B. Anjaneyulu R/o. Telagayapalam Village, Pedapalam (Post), Kakumanu (Mandal) Guntur District. ..... PETITIONER(S) AND 1 Chairman Railway Board, New Delhi. 2 General Manager, South Central Railway, Railnilayam, Secunderabad. 3 Chief Security Commissioner (HQRS) Railway Protection Force, South Central Railway, Railnilayam, Secunderabad. .....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 issue a Writ, direction order or orders more particularly one in the nature of Writ of MANDAMUS declaring that the proceedings No. X/P/564/Vol. VIII, dated 12-02- 1994 issued by the 3rd respondent herein and consequent notification of fresh employment notice 1/94 dated 29-04-94 is illegal arbitrary, against principles of natural Justice and without jurisdiction and as a consequential direction direct the respondents to appoint the petitioners as Railway Protection Special Force and R.P.F. Constables as per the selections made between February, 93 to June '93 pursuant to the notification No. 1/92. Counsel for the Petitioner:MR.GANDURI NAGESWARA RAO, Advocte Counsel for the Respondent Nos.1 to 3: MR.GOURI SHANKAR SANGHI, SC for Railways. The Court made the following : O R D E R: This writ petition is filed seeking a direction to the respondents to appoint them as Railway Protection Force Constables in the selection made in pursuance of the Notification No.1/92. 2. The learned counsel for the petitioners is not present, however, the learned counsel for the respondents, Mr.Gouri Shankar Sastri, submits that the petitioners No.2 and 3 were appointed and they are working. As far as the petitioner No.1 is concerned, he did not possess the requisite marks in the written examination, therefore, he was not selected. 3. Under these circumstances, nothing survives in this writ petition. The writ petition is accordingly dismissed. There shall be no order as to costs. _________________ G. BIKSHAPATHY, J Dated 4th November, 2004. Mrb/Bcj ASSISTANT REGISTRAR // TRUE COPY // SECTION OFFICER To 1 Chairman, Railway Board, New Delhi. 2 General Manager, South Central Railway, Railnilayam, Secunderabad. 3 Chief Security Commissioner (HQRS) Railway Protection Force, South Central Railway, Railnilayam, Secunderabad. 4. Two CD copies