THE HON’BLE Ms. JUSTICE G. ROHINI Writ Petition No. 12871 of 1999 Dated: 26.03.2010 Between: Mummanna Sanyasi Rao and 7 others … Petitioners And Visakhapatnam Steel Plant Rep., by its Chairman & Managing Director Visakhapatnam. … Respondents THE HON'BLE Ms. JUSTICE G.ROHINI Writ Petition No. 12871 of 1999 O R D E R : This writ petition is filed seeking a declaration that the action of the respondent-Visakhapatnam steel plant in not considering the cases of the petitioners for the posts of Khalasis and Technicians is arbitrary and illegal. It is the case of the petitioners that they were displaced persons consequent to the establishment of the respondent steel plant and in terms of the scheme formulated by the respondent for employing the displaced persons or their nominees, they were entitled to be considered for appointment in a suitable post. It is also claimed that all the petitioners were issued identity cards and on the basis of the same, they applied for the posts of Khalasis and Technicians in response to the notification issued by the respondent. Alleging that the respondent failed to consider their candidature, the present writ petition has been filed. A counter affidavit has been filed on behalf of the respondent in which the fact that the petitioners 1 to 5 had appeared for physical test and interview for the post of Khalasi on 15.02.2000 and 16.02.2000 has not been disputed. However, it is stated that the petitioners 2 to 4 were not selected and therefore, no offer was issued to them. So far as the petitioners 1 and 5 were concerned, it is stated that though they were selected, the further proceedings were kept in abeyance since their status as displaced person was yet to be confirmed by the Special Officer (Land Acquisition). I have heard the learned counsel for both the parties. Sri V.Ravinder Rao, learned counsel appearing for the respondent under instructions stated that the names of the respondents 1 and 5 were returned by the Special Officer (Land acquisition (steel plant) with remarks “R. card not traced”. The learned counsel submitted that unless their status as displaced persons is established, they cannot be given employment and therefore, no mandamus can be issued as sought by the petitioners. Having regard to the facts and circumstances and keeping in view the stand taken by the respondent in the counter affidavit, the writ petition is disposed of with a direction to the respondent to inform the petitioners 1 and 5 about the report received from the Special Officer (Land Acquisition (steel plant). On receipt of such intimation, if aggrieved, it is open to the petitioners 1 and 5 to work out the appropriate remedy as available under law. The Writ Petition is accordingly disposed of. No costs. ______________ G. ROHINI, J. Date: 26.03.2010 KLP