IN THE HIGH COURT JUDICATURE ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD FRIDAY, THE TWENTY THIRD DAY OF DECEMBER TWO THOUSAND AND ELEVEN PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE G.CHANDRAIAH W.P. No.33935 of 2011 Between: A.Naga Suresh … Petitioner and State of A.P., Rep.by its Secretary to Government, Education Department, Secretariat, Saifabad, Hyderabad and others. … Respnodents THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE G.CHANDRAIAH W.P. No.33935 of 2011 ORDER: This writ petition has been filed seeking for issuance of Writ of Mandamus declaring the action of the respondents 1 and 2 in not absorbing the petitioner in aided post of Lecturer in Political Science in the 3rd respondent’s College and trying to fill up by surplus staff from other aided institutions without considering the entitlement of the petitioner for absorption in the said post and issue consequential direction to the respondents 1 and 2 to consider and absorb the petitioner in the existing aided vacancy in the 3rd respondent’s College. Brief facts of the case are that the petitioner was appointed in the 3rd respondent’s College, Sathavahana College, as lecturer in Political Science on 18.06.2005 in un-aided post. While so, on 03.01.2009, the 3rd respondent submitted a proposal for absorption of the petitioner into vacant aided post to the 1st and 2nd respondents. Thereafter, the 2nd respondent addressed a letter dated 28.04.2009 to the 3rd respondent to furnish certain details and in turn the 3rd respondent vide letter dated 22.05.2009 furnished the details as desired by the 2nd respondent and the matter is pending with the 2nd respondent. The learned counsel for the petitioner would submit that one lecturer teaching Political Science subject retired from service on attaining the age of superannuation and the same is lying vacant. He further submits that since the 3rd respondent furnished the details as desired by the 2nd respondent and the matter is pending with the 2nd respondent, who is competent authority to consider the case of the petitioner, the 2nd respondent may be directed to consider the case of the petitioner and pass appropriate orders, in accordance with law. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned Government Pleader and perused the material on record. It is categorical averment that there are aided vacancies in the 3rd respondent’s College and the 3rd respondent submitted proposal to the respondents 1 and 2 requesting to absorb the petitioner into vacant aided post. Thereafter, the 2nd respondent addressed a letter to the 3rd respondent seeking to furnish certain information in respect of the petitioner and the 3rd respondent furnished the details as desired by the 2nd respondent and the matter is pending with the 2nd respondent. Therefore, I am of the view that without going into the merits of the case, this writ petition can be disposed of as under. The 2nd respondent, Commissioner, is directed to consider the proposal and the details furnished by the 3rd respondent and pass appropriate orders, in accordance with law, within a period of two months, from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. With the above direction, this writ petition is disposed of. There shall be no order as to costs. ________________________ JUSTICE G.CHANDRAIAH Date: 23.12.2011 LSK