IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction) THURSDAY, THE TWENTY EIGHTH DAY OF AUGUST TWO THOUSAND AND EIGHT PRESENT THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE GHULAM MOHAMMED and THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE C.V.RAMULU WRIT PETITION NO : 18641 of 2008 Between: P.V.Subba Rao S/o.Satyanarayan Muthy DSO Department of Civil Supplies Sanga Reddy,Medak District ..... PETITIONER AND 1 The Commissioner of Civil Supplies and Ex-Officio Secretrary To Government Dept of Civil Supplies Civil Supplies Bhavan,Erramanzil Hyderbad 2 The District Collector Ranga Reddy 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 issue an order or direction or writ,more particularly one in the nature of writ of Certiorari Calling for records in OA No.3857 of 2008 on the ﬁle of AP Administrative Tribunal and Consequently set aside the order dt 28-05-2008 and pass Counsel for the Petitioner:MR.NAGESH BHEEMAPAKA Counsel for the Respondent No.: GP FOR CIVIL SUPPLIES The Court made the following : HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE GHULAM MOHAMMED AND HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE C.V.RAMULU Writ Petition No.18641 of 2008 ORDER: (Per Hon’ble Sri Justice Ghulam Mohammed) This writ petition is ﬁled challenging the interim order dated 28-05-2008 passed in O.A.No.3857 of 2008 on the file of Andhra Pradesh Administrative Tribunal at Hyderabad. 2. The petitioner ﬁled the above O.A. challenging his transfer order and by the impugned order, the Tribunal admitted O.A., and directed the respondents to maintain status quo as on 28-05-2008, pending further orders. The grievance of the petitioner is that he has not been relieved and he is continuing to work at the same place of posting and that the impugned order is by way of fax message dated 14-05-2008 and the same was not communicated to him. It is further stated that he has ﬁled contempt case complaining non- implementation of the status quo order passed by the Tribunal, which was closed on the premise that status quo was ordered and as such, there is no contempt committed. 3. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned Government Pleader and perused the record. 4. A reading of the impugned order shows that the Tribunal admitted the O.A. and ordered the oﬃcial respondents to maintain status quo. It is thus clear that O.A. is still pending and the petitioner has rushed to this Court without there being any ﬁnal decision of the Tribunal in the O.A. In the absence of any ﬁnal adjudication by the Tribunal on merits of the case, we are not inclined to entertain the writ petition and express any opinion at this stage. In fact, the Tribunal in its discretion had granted status quo and ordered notice to the oﬃcial respondents to give them reasonable opportunity of ﬁling counter and hearing. In the circumstances, we are not inclined to interfere with the impugned order. 5. Since it is averred that the petitioner is due to retire from service on 30-9-2008 and the Tribunal had ordered status quo by which the petitioner is not being allowed to discharge the duties, we direct the Tribunal to dispose of the interlocutory application, within a period of two weeks from today, after giving opportunity to both the sides. 6. Accordingly, the writ petition is dismissed at the stage of admission. ___________________________ GHULAM MOHAMMED, J. ___________________ C.V.RAMULU, J. 28-08-2008 Note: Dispatch copy of order by today. (b/o) bsc