IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction) FRIDAY, THE THIRTEENTH DAY OF JUNE TWO THOUSAND AND EIGHT PRESENT HON'BLE MR JUSTICE R.SUBHASH REDDY WRIT PETITION NO.17203 of 1999 Between: B. Satyanarayana, S/o. Applanaidu, R/o. chinakapu veedhi, Palakonda (P), Srikakulam. ... PETITIONER AND 1 The A.P. TRANSCO , Rep. by Addl. secretary, Vidyut Soudha , Khairatabad, Hyderabad. 2 The Superintending Engineer, Operative Circle, A.P.TRANASCO, Srikakulam 532 001. ...RESPONDENTS Petition under Article 226 of the constitution of India praying that in the circumstances stated in the Affidavit filed herein the High Court may be pleased to issue an order, or direction, more particularly one in the nature of Writ of Mandamus declaring the action of the respondents in not considering the case of the petitioner in view of the Judgment of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in S.L.P.(C) No.13766/97 and Judgment of this Hon'ble division Bench in W.P.No.18134/93 dt.22.8.96 and as per their Memo B.P.M.sNo.36 dt.18.5.97 for the post of J.L.M. or any other suitable post as the ground that Ban under act2/1994 as illegal, arbitrary unjust and violative of Article 14 and 16 of the constitution of India and consequently direct the respondents to appoint the petitioner as J.L.M with all consequential benefits from the date of selection. Counsel for the Petitioner: Mr. M. VISWANADHAM Counsel for the Respondents: Mr. S. RAVINDRANATH The Court made the following: Order: Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the subject matter of the writ petition has become infructuous. Recording the submission of the learned counsel, the writ petition is dismissed as infructuous. No order as to costs. __________________________ JUSTICE R. SUBHASH REDDY. June 13, 2008 MRR