IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction) FRIDAY, THE THIRD DAY OF JULY TWO THOUSAND AND NINE PRESENT THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE NOOTY RAMAMOHANA RAO WRIT PETITION NO : 11223 of 2000 Between: 1 V Kondala Rao S/o Venkata Ramana Murthy Visakhapatnam Port Trust, Visakhapatnam 2 D Amarnath S/o Venkata Rao Visakhapatnam Port Trust, Visakhapatnam ..... PETITIONER(S) AND 1 Union of India, rep by its Secretary, Ministry of Surface Transport, Transport Bhavan No.1, Parliament Street, New Delhi-110001 2 Visakhapatnam Port Trust, rep by its Chairmen Visakhapatnam 3 Chief Engineer, I/c Engineering Department Visakhapatnam Port Trust cum Selection Committee Chairman for the Posts of Junior Assistants in Engineering Department .....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 issue any Writ Order or direction particularly one in the nature of MANDAMUS declaring the selections conducted to the post of Junior Assistants held on 18/6/1999 as arbitrary, illegal, unjust and violative of the Fundamental Rights guaranteed to the petitioners under Articles 14, 16 and 21 of the Constitution of India besides being violative of the Government of India instructions and the Visakhapatnam Port Trust (Recruitment, Seniority and Promotion) Regulations 1964 and consequently direct the Respondents to regularize the Petitioners services with all consequential and attendant benefits w.e.f., 7/9/1998 (The date on which we completed ad hoc service of one year) and protect their seniority in accordance with law and pass such other relief or reliefs as this Hon'ble Court may deem fit and proper in the circumstances of the case. Counsel for the Petitioner:DR.P.B.VIJAY KUMAR Counsel for the Respondent No.: MR.A.RAJASHEKAR REDDY (ASST SOLICITOR GEN) The Court made the following : HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE NOOTY RAMAMOHANA RAO W.P.No.11223 of 2000 O R D E R: Learned counsel for the petitioners has circulated a letter to the Registry seeking permission for withdrawing the writ petition. The Writ Petition is accordingly dismissed as withdrawn. No order as to costs. ___________________________ NOOTY RAMAMOHANA RAO,J 03rd July, 2009 PNV