HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE OF ANDHRA PRADESH THE HON’BLE SMT. JUSTICE T.MEENA KUMARI AND THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE G.V.SEETHAPATHY WRIT PETITION No. 24605 OF 2010 Wednesday, the Sixth Day of October, Two Thousand and Ten Between The Govt. of Andhra Pradesh, Rep. By the Principal Secretary to Govt. Home Department, Secretariat Buildings, Hyderabad and others Petitioners AND D.V. Kishore and another Respondents ORAL ORDER: (Per the Hon’ble Smt. Justice T.Meena Kumari) Assailing the order dated 07.06.2010 passed in O.A. No. 3265 of 2010 by the A.P. Administrative Tribunal, Hyderabad, directing the petitioners herein to consider the case of the first respondent for promotion to the post of Deputy Superintendent of Police without reference to the disciplinary proceedings pending against him pursuant to the Charge Memo issued by the fourth petitioner herein and consequently to quash the same, the present writ petition is filed. The first respondent herein was charge sheeted in the month of April, 2010 for certain derelictions and disciplinary proceeding was initiated against him, as such, he filed the above O.A. before the A.P. Administrative Tribunal seeking to quash the same and for a further direction to consider his case for promotion as Deputy Superintendent of Police without reference to the said proceedings. The Tribunal, while issuing notice to the petitioners returnable in four weeks, passed the order impugned directing the petitioners herein to consider the case of the respondent for promotion to the post of Deputy Superintendent of Police without reference to the disciplinary proceedings pending against him reserving liberty to the petitioners herein to take disciplinary action against the first respondent in the promoted post. Aggrieved thereby, the present writ petition is filed by the Government. Admittedly, the preset writ petition is filed assailing the interim order dated 7.6.2010 passed in the above O.A. to consider the case of the first respondent to the post of Deputy Superintendent of Police by reserving liberty to them to take disciplinary action against him in the promoted post. Since the writ petition is filed against an interlocutory order, suffice if liberty to granted to the petitioners to move the Tribunal by filing appropriate application and raise all the objections that are sought to be contended before this court. With this observation, the writ petition fails and is accordingly dismissed. No order as to costs. ____________________ Justice T.Meena Kumari ____________________ Justice G.V. Seethapathy October 6, 2010 MAS.