IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction) FRIDAY, THE EIGHTH DAY OF JULY TWO THOUSAND AND FIVE PRESENT THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE N.V. RAMANA WRIT PETITION NO.4337 of 1999 Between: 1 A. Siddamma D/o Venkatasubbaiah R/o Tirupati, Chittoor Dist. 2 G. Chiranjeevi S/o Venkataiah R/o Tirupati, Chittoor Dist. 3 G. Gopi S/o Laxmaiah R/o Tirupati, Chittoor Dist. 4 G. Ashok S/o Laxmaiah R/o Tirupati, Chittoor Dist. 5 A. Krishnamurthy S/o Munikrishnaiah R/o Tirupati, Chittoor Dist. 6 K. Muniramaiah S/o Munikrishnaiah R/o Tirupati, Chittoor Dist. 7 Gnana Prakash S/o Krishnaiah R/o Tirupati, Chittoor Dist. ..... PETITIONERS AND 1 The District Employment Officer Employment Exchange, Chittoor 2 The executive Officer, T.T.D. Tirupathi, Chittoor Dist. ....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 a Writ, order or direction more particularly a Writ of Mandamus declaring the action of the 1st respondent in not sponsoring the names of petitioners and not considering the applications of petitioners dt: 4-11-1998 is arbitrary, illegal, violation of principles of natural justice and Art. 14 and 16 of Constitution of India and consequently direct the respondents to permit the petitioners for interview and test for the posts of Junior Assistants scheduled to be held on 7-3-1999 or any other dates. Counsel for the Petitioners: MR.K.VENKATESWARLU (not present) Counsel for Respondent No.1 : G.P. FOR EMPLOYMENT & TRAINING Counsel for the Respondent No.2: MR P. Nageswara Rao, SC for TTD The Court made the following: ORDER: Questioning the action of the respondent No.1 in not sponsoring the names of the petitioners for interview, scheduled to be held on 07.03.1999, for recruitment as Junior Assistants under backlog vacancies reserved for S.C. Category in Tirumala Tirupathi Devasthanam, Tirupathi, the present writ petition is filed. Today, when the matter is taken up for hearing, none appears for the petitioners. Learned Standing Counsel appearing on behalf of the respondent-Devasthanam submits that by lapse of time the prayer in the writ petition has become infructuous. Recording the said submission, the writ petition is dismissed as having become infructuous. No costs. _______________ N.V. RAMANA, J. Date: 08.07.2005 DA ASSISTANT REGISTRAR // TRUE COPY // SECTION OFFICER To 1 The District Employment Officer Employment Exchange, Chittoor 2 The executive Officer, T.T.D. Tirupathi, Chittoor Dist. 3 2 CD copies Form-NIC-OGS/WP{BDLNM}