IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction) MONDAY, THE FOURTEENTH DAY OF JULY TWO THOUSAND AND EIGHT PRESENT THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE GHULAM MOHAMMED and THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE C.V.RAMULU WRIT PETITION NO : 21932 of 2006 Between: N.D. Mallikarjuna Serma, S/o. Late N.V. Anjaneya Sarma, Assistant Accountant, EC No.121, Accounts (Sales), Nuclear Fuel Complex, Hyderabad - 500 062 ..... PETITIONER AND 1 Union of India, rep by its Secretary, Department of Atomic Energy, Anushakthi Bhawan, C.S.M.Marg, Mumbai - 400 039. 2 Chief Executive, Nuclear Fuel Complex, Hyderabad - 500 062. .....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 any writ, order or direction particularly one in the nature of MANDAMUS declaring the order dt. 9-6-2006 in OA No. 349 of 2003 on the ﬁle of Central Administrative Tribunal, Hyderabad as illegal, arbitrary, capricious and by nullifying the same consequential direct the respondents to grant second ﬁnancial up-gradation in the pay scale of Rs. 6500 - 10500 with effect from 09-8-1999 with all consequential and attendant beneﬁts and pass such other order or orders as this Hon'ble Court may deem fit and proper in the circumstances of the case. Counsel for the Petitioner:DR.P.B.VIJAY KUMAR Counsel for the Respondents: MR.A.RAJASHEKAR REDDY (ASST. SOLICITOR GEN) The Court made the following: THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE GHULAM MOHAMMED and THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE C.V.RAMULU WRIT PETITION NO : 21932 of 2006 O R D E R: This writ petition is ﬁled by the petitioner seeking a writ of MANDAMUS declaring the order dt. 9-6-2005 in OA No. 349 of 2003 on the ﬁle of Central Administrative Tribunal, Hyderabad as illegal, arbitrary, capricious and consequently direct the respondents to grant second ﬁnancial up-gradation in the pay scale of Rs. 6500 - 10500 with eﬀect from 09-8-1999 with all consequential and attendant benefits. Heard Sri P.B.Vijay Kumar, learned counsel for the petitioner and Sri A. Rajasekhar Reddy, Assistant Solicitor General, appearing for the respondents and perused the record. While disposing of O.A.349 of 2003, the Tribunal passed the order as follows: “Since the grievance of the applicant has already been redressed, the OA is disposed of as not pressed for. However, if the applicant is further aggrieved by the order passed by the respondents, he is at liberty to approach the Tribunal by ﬁling a fresh application, after exhausting the remedies available to the applicant.” The Tribunal as stated above, while considering the said O.A. held that the grievance of the petitioner was already redressed and the learned counsel for the petitioner therein reported that he was not pressing the OA, disposed of the same by giving liberty to the petitioner to approach the Tribunal by filing a fresh application. When, once, the petitioner not pressed for the O.A., and the Tribunal made it clear that it is open to the petitioner to make a fresh application, we do not ﬁnd any merits in this writ petition and the same is liable to be dismissed. In view of the above, we are of the considered opinion that there is no error of law in the orders passed by the Tribunal requiring interference of this Court under Article 226 of the Constitution. Accordingly, the writ petition is dismissed. No costs. ___________________ GHULAM MOHAMMED, J ______________ C.V. RAMULU, J Date: 14-07-2008 Rns. ..... REGISTRAR // TRUE COPY // SECTION OFFICER To 1.2CCs to 2.2CD copies Form-NIC-OGS/WP{RLD}