IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction) MONDAY, THE TWENTY SECOND DAY OF JUNE TWO THOUSAND AND NINE PRESENT THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE GOPALA KRISHNA TAMADA WRIT PETITION NO : 5402 of 2003 Between: P.Md.Ismail, S/o P.Abdul Khader, R/o 8-79, A-I, Kavadi Street, Kurnool, Kurnool District. ..... PETITIONER AND 1 The Regional Manager, A.P.S.R.T.C., Kurnool Region, Kurnool District. 2 The Depot Manager, A.P.S.R.T.C., Kurnool-I Depot, Kurnool District. .....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 to issued writ order or dorection more particularly one in the nature of Writ Mandamus declaring the action of the 2nd Respondent in issuing the proceedings dt.23.5.2002 in so far imposing the punishment of deferment of annual increment when next falls due be deferred for a period of two years which shall have effect of postponing future increments and treating the period of suspension as not on duty as illegal, arbitray and unjust and consequently direct the Respondent to set aside the proceedings dt.23.5.2002, Counsel for the Petitioner:MR.G.RAVI MOHAN Counsel for the Respondent No.: MR.P.VINAYAKA SWAMY The Court made the following : ORDER: The petitioner filed this Writ Petition under Article 226 of Constitution of India, seeking to issue a writ of Mandamus declaring the action of respondent No2 in issuing the proceedings dated 23.05.2002 in so far imposing the punishment of deferment of annual increment when next falls due be deferred for a period of two years which shall have effect of postponing future increments and treating the period of suspension as not on duty as illegal, arbitrary and unjust and consequently direct the respondent to set aside the proceedings dated 23.05.2002. 2. The learned counsel for the petitioner seeks permission of the Court to permit the petitioner to withdraw the petition and the learned counsel for the petitioner, on instructions, addressed a letter dated 17.06.2009 to the registry stating that petitioner intended to withdraw this writ petition. 3. In view of the representation made by the learned counsel for the petitioner, permission is accorded to withdraw the Writ Petition. 4. Accordingly, the Writ Petition is dismissed as withdrawn. _________________________ GOPALA KRISHNA TAMADA, J Dated June 22, 2009 KSH