IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction) WEDNESDAY, THE SEVENTEENTH DAY OF SEPTEMBER TWO THOUSAND AND EIGHT PRESENT THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE C.V.RAMULU WRIT PETITION NO : 3654 of 2006 Between: Mumtaz Hashim W/o.Mohd.Hashim Stanley Girls Junior College Chapel Road, Hyderabad- 500001 ..... PET IT IONER AND 1 Managing Committee, Hyderabad Regional Conference Methodist Church of India, rep.by its Chairperson, Hyderabad-500001 2 Stanley Girls Junior College, rep.by its Manager & Correspondent, Chapel Road, Abids, hyderabad -500001 3 Governing Body, Hyderabad REgional Conference, Methodist Chruch of India, Hyderabad -500001 Rep.by its Generral Secretary 4 The Director of Higher Education, Government of A.P., Next to Intermediate Board, Nampally, Hyderabad 5 Government of A.P., rep.by its Secretary, Board of Intermediate Education, Nampally, Hyderabad 6 Regional Provident Fund Commissioner, PF office, Barkatpura, Hyderabad .....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 to issue any writ order or direction more particulrly one in the name of mandamus declaring the impugned proceedings dated 25.1.2006 (received on 23.2.2006) of the respondent- management retrenching services of the petitioner as arbitrary, illegal, and contrary to law and by nullifying the same direct the continuance of the petitioner in the Organization with all consequential and attendant beneﬁts and also direct the Oﬃcial respondents to take over the Institution with infrastructure and run the same and pass Counsel for the Petitioner:DR.P.B.VIJAY KUMAR Counsel for the Respondent No.: GP FOR HIGHER EDUCATION The Court made the following : THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE C.V.RAMULU W.P.No.3654 of 2006 ORAL ORDER: It appears, petitioner while working as Junior Lecturer in Hindi at Stanley Girls Junior College, Hyderabad, was terminated from service vides impugned proceedings dated 25.1.2006. Hence the writ petition. This Court, while admitting the writ petition on 27.2.2006 directed the respondents to continue the petitioner in service by suspending the impugned proceedings dated 25.1.2006. Now the learned counsel for petitioner states that four months thereafter, petitioner on attaining the age of superannuation, retired from service with eﬀect from 30.6.2006 and therefore nothing survives in the writ petition for further adjudication. In view of the same, the writ petition is closed directing the respondents to consider, payment of retiral beneﬁts as per the entitlement of the petitioner and decide the same within a period of four weeks from the date of receipt of this order and communicate the same to the petitioner. No order as to costs. ____________ C.V.RAMULU, J Date: 17.9.2008 DA THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE C.V.RAMULU W.P.No.3654 of 2006 17.9.2008