IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction) SATURDAY, THE EIGHTEENTH DAY OF OCTOBER TWO THOUSAND AND EIGHT PRESENT THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE G.CHANDRAIAH W.V.M.P.No.2967 of 2008 and WRIT PETITION NO : 8364 of 2004 Between: D.Johni, s/o J.Dasan, r/o Central Industrial Security Force, FSTI, NISA, Hakimpet, Hyderabad. ..... WRIT PETITIONER AND 1 Union of India, rep., by its Director General, Central Industrial Security Force, Ministry of Home Affairs, 13, CGO Complex, Lodhi Road, New Delhi-03. 2 Deputy Inspector General/Fire, 13, CGO Complex, Lodhi Road, New Delhi. 3 Sital Singh, CISF No.861340543, Chandrapura Thermal Power Station, Chandrapura, Jharkand State. .....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 issue writ or order or direction more particularly one in the nature of writ of mandamus declaring the action of the ﬁrst respondent in absorbing the 3rd respondent and others who worked as Head Constable Drivers of Executive Branch in the Fire Branch as Head Constable Drivers cum Pump Operators with retrospective eﬀect from 14-10-1991 vide proceedings no.F-29012/2/93/Vol.IV/ESTT.I/933, dated 6-9- 2000 contrary to the rule 16 of CISF Rule, 1969 corresponding Rule 22 of CISF Rules, 2001 duly rejecting the representation, dated 4-3-2004 vide proceedings No.E-31016/30/Estt.I/2004-361, dated 01-04-2004 as illegal, arbitrary and violative of Articles 14 and 16 of the Constitution of India and consequently promote the petitioner to the post of Sub-Inspector Fire Branch with all monetary benefits. Counsel for the Petitioner: MR.B.PARAMESEWARA RAO Counsel for the Respondents: MR.A.RAJASHEKAR REDDY (ASST SOLICITOR GEN) The Court made the following : COMMON ORDER: The petitioner in the writ petition sought for issuance of writ of mandamus declaring the action of the ﬁrst respondent in absorbing the third respondent and others who worked as Head Constable Drivers of Executive Branch in the Fire Branch as Head Constable Drivers-cum-Pump Operators with retrospective eﬀect from 14-10-1991 vide proceedings No.F-29012/2/93/Vol.IV/ESTT.I/933, dated 06-09-2000 contrary to Rule 16 of CISF Rule, 1969, corresponding Rule 22 of CISF Rules, 2001 duly rejecting the representation, dated 04-03- 2004 vide proceedings No.E-31016/30/Estt.I/2004-361, dated 01-04-2004 as illegal, arbitrary and violative of Articles 14 and 16 of the Constitution of India, and consequently, promote the petitioner to the post of Sub-Inspector, Fire Branch, with all monetary benefits. The petitioner also ﬁled W.P.M.P.No.29673 of 2004 seeking a direction to the respondents 1 and 2 not to ﬁx the pay ﬁxation to respondent No.3, pending disposal of the writ petition. The interim direction was granted by this Court on 04- 04-2005 in W.P.M.P.No.29673 of 2004 as prayed for in view of the direction already granted in W.P.M.P.No.29038 of 2004 in W.P.No.22155 of 2004 which is a separate writ petition not connected with the petitioner. Thereafter, the petitioner ﬁled another W.P.M.P.No.10849 of 2004 seeking stay of all further proceedings in pursuance of Proceedings No.E.31016/30/Estt.I/2004-361, dated 01-04-2004 of the ﬁrst respondent pending disposal of the writ petition. This Court, by order dated 26-07-2004, dismissed the WPMP by observing that any promotions made pending disposal of the writ petition shall be subject to the result of the writ petition. On behalf of the third respondent the present vacate petition is filed seeking to vacate the interim order dated 04-04-2005. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the third respondent in the writ petition has submitted an application dated 01-09-2008 seeking voluntary retirement from service with eﬀect from 30-11-2008 due to his domestic problem and the same has been accepted by the respondents. Learned counsel also has placed the proceedings No.E-28014/34/ADM/VR/2008/2397 dated 20-09- 2008 wherein it is stated by the Commandant, CISF Unit HTPP, Kasimpur, that the request of the third respondent for voluntary retirement from service is accepted provisionally in terms of Rule-48 (A) CCS (Pension) Rules 1972. Learned counsel for the third respondent-vacate petitioner submits that in view of the interim order granted by this Court though the third respondent has been retired from service on voluntary retirement, his terminal beneﬁts have not been finalized. On the other hand, learned counsel for the writ petitioner submits that he has no objection for vacating the interim order already granted by this Court, but he wants to argue the main writ petition after some time. But on the other hand, learned counsel for the third respondent submits that the main claim of the writ petitioner over the third respondent pertains to the seniority and now in view of the fact that the third respondent has already availed the beneﬁt of voluntary retirement, the issue of seniority will not be the criteria and the petitioner may not have any claim over the third respondent-vacate petitioner. Therefore, he submits that the writ petition has become infructuous. Having regard to the facts and circumstances of the case and in view of the fact that the third respondent has already applied for the beneﬁt of voluntary retirement and which has been already accepted by the authorities concerned, the interim order granted by this Court on 04-04- 2005 in W.P.M.P.No.29673 of 2004 is vacated and the writ petition is closed as no further orders need to be passed for the relief sought for in the writ petition. It is open for the petitioner, if he is so advised, to make a representation to the authorities concerned seeking for promotion and it is for the authorities concerned to consider his case in accordance with law. No order as to costs. __________________ 18th October, 2008 NOTE: Furnish c.c. by one week. B/o. SKM