IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction) FRIDAY, THE EIGHTH DAY OF AUGUST TWO THOUSAND AND EIGHT PRESENT THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE L.NARASIMHA REDDY WRIT PETITION No. 16812 of 2008 Between: P.B. Sharoon S/o P. deva Sahayam R/o Jagandhapuram Near Income tax Office, Bapatla, Guntur district. ..... PETITIONER AND 1 The Associate Dean Acharya N.G. Ranga Agricultural University, Bapatla, Guntur District. 2 The Senior Scientist (Agro) &Head of the Agricultural Colege farm, Achara NG Ranga Agricultural University, Bapatla, Guntur District. 3 The Registrar, acharya N.G. Ranga Agricultural University, Rajendranagar, Hyderabad. .....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 Writ, order or direction more particularly one in the nature of Writ of Mandamus, directing the respondents herein to retain and continue the petitioner as casual Labour in the 2nd respondent oﬃce with all consequential beneﬁts, and pass such other order or orders. Counsel for the Petitioner: MRS.P.R.V.KADAMBARI Counsel for the Respondents: MR.K.SURESHREDDY The Court made the following ORDER: The petitioner is working as a Casual Labour in the Agricultural College, Bapatla, which is a constituent college of the third respondent-University. He remained absent from 13.05.2006 onwards. It is stated that he reported to duty on 01.01.2007. The second respondent, under whom the petitioner was working, addressed a letter, dated 04.10.2007, to the third respondent with a request to permit the petitioner to rejoin duty and to condone the breaking service. The grievance of the petitioner is that no action has been taken thereon. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned Standing Counsel for the respondents. It is represented by the learned Standing Counsel that the third respondent has since passed an order on the letter, dated 04.10.2007, addressed by the second respondent, the copy thereof has not been communicated to the petitioner, as yet. In case, the order passed by the third respondent confers any right upon the petitioner, he has to reap the beneﬁt thereof. On the other hand, if it is contrary to his interest, he has to work out his remedies. Hence, the writ petition is disposed of, directing the third respondent to communicate the order passed by him on the letter, dated 04.10.2007, addressed by the second respondent, to the petitioner, within a period of ﬁfteen (15) days from today. It shall be open to the petitioner to work out his remedies, depending on the nature of the disposal given by the third respondent. There shall be no order as to costs. ___________________ L.NARASIMHA REDDY,J Dt:08.08.2008 kdl ..... REGISTRAR // TRUE COPY // SECTION OFFICER To 1.2CCs to 2.2CD copies Form-NIC-OGS/WP{TRT}