IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction) MONDAY, THE FIFTH DAY OF OCTOBER, TWO THOUSAND NINE HON’BLE SRI ANIL R.DAVE, THE CHIEF JUSTICE AND HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE C.V.NAGARJUNA REDDY WRIT PETITION No.20714 of 2009 Between: Akhila Bharatiya Adivasi Vikash Parishad (A.P. Branch), Registration No.49/67, repd., by its District Unit President, Lochaliput Street, Paderu, Visakhapatnam District. …Petitioner And: The Government of Andhra Pradesh, Reptd., by Principal Secretary, Department of Agriculture & Co-operation (FP-I), Secretariat, Hyderabad and six others. Counsel for the Petitioner: Sri Peeta Raman. Counsel for the Respondents: G.P. for Co-operation for R.1 G.P. for Forests for R2, R4 and R5. G.P. for Agriculture for R.3. This Court made the following: HON’BLE SRI ANIL R.DAVE, THE CHIEF JUSTICE AND HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE C.V.NAGARJUNA REDDY WRIT PETITION No.20714 of 2009 ORDER: (Per C.V.Nagarjuna Reddy,J.,) This Writ Petition is filed for the following substantive relief: “ … to issue an order, direction or Writ, more particularly one in the nature of Writ of Mandamus, declaring the inaction of the 3rd respondent in not sending panel of names of Assistant Directors of Agriculture with full bio- data in pursuance of the 4th respondent’s Ref.No.32387/2008/M2, dt.21-7-2009 and action of the 3rd respondent in issuing proceedings, vide No.AI(I)249/08, dt.18-7-2009, appointing the 6th respondent as Assistant Director of Agriculture (SC), RVP, Araku Valley, as illegal, arbitrary, unjust, non-application of mind, contrary to G.O. (P) No.10, dt.22-1-1993, and contrary to G.O.Ms.No.967, dt.17-12-1988, and is amounting to extraneous consideration and violative of Art.14 & 16 of the Constitution of India and consequently direct the 3rd respondent to repatriate the 6th respondent and also direct him to send a panel of names of Assistant Directors of Agriculture with full bio-data in pursuance of the 4th respondent’s Ref.No.32387/2008/M2, dt.21-7-2009”. After arguing the case for some time, Sri Peeta Raman, learned counsel for the petitioner, sought permission of the Court to withdraw the Writ Petition with liberty to the petitioner to approach the Government of Andhra Pradesh with appropriate representation for redressal of its grievance. The request of the learned counsel is accepted and the Writ Petition is dismissed as withdrawn with liberty in terms of the prayer made. ANIL R. DAVE, CJ., C.V.NAGARJUNA REDDY, J Dt.05-10-2009 MNR