IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction) TUESDAY, THE TWENTY FIRST DAY OF OCTOBER TWO THOUSAND AND EIGHT PRESENT THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE G.CHANDRAIAH WRIT PETITION NO : 2986 of 2005 Between: Smt. Madipalli Rayamallu, W/o. Late Rajaiah, R/o. Adivarampeta, Muktharam Mandal, Karimnagar District. ..... PETITIONER AND 1 Andhra Bank, Sultan Bazar, Hyderabad, rep by its Managing Director 2 Andhra Bank, Zonal Office, Karimnagar, rep by its Assistant General Manager 3 Andhra Bank, Begumpet Branch, Karimnagar District, rep by its Branch Manager .....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 issue an Order, directions or Writ more particularly one in the nature of Writ of Mandamus, declaring the action of the oﬃcials of the Respondent Bank in not increasing/paying the salary of the petitioner on par/equal to the salary of other similarly placed employees of the Respondent Bank as per the principle of equal pay for equal work is in violation of Article 14 and 39 (d) of the Constitution of India, Directive Principles of State Policy, in violation of the provisions of Equal Remuneration Act, 1976, arbitrary, illegal, unjustiﬁed, contrary to the law laid down by the Hon'ble Apex Court and consequently direct the Respondents herein to pay the equal salary to the petitioner on part with the other similar category/similar placed employees of the Respondent Bank, with retrospective eﬀect from the date of joining the length of service of the petitioner and pass such other order or orders as this Hon'ble Court may deem fit and proper in the interest of justice Counsel for the Petitioner:MR.P.PURUSHOTHAM REDDY Counsel for the Respondent No.: DR.K.LAKSHMI NARASIMHA The Court made the following : ORDER: On 18-10-2008, at the request of the learned counsel for the petitioner, this Court permitted to post the matter for withdrawal. Accordingly, the matter has been listed. Having regard to the permission sought for by the petitioner to withdraw the writ petition, the permission is accorded. Accordingly, the Writ Petition is dismissed as withdrawn. No costs. __________________ 21st October, 2008 SKM