IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction) THURSDAY, THE TWENTY SIXTH DAY OF MARCH TWO THOUSAND AND NINE PRESENT THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE C.V.NAGARJUNA REDDY WRIT PETITION NO : 5001 of 2009 Between: Prof. A. Chennakesava Reddy S/o. A. Laxmi Reddy C/o. Department of Mechanical Engineering, JNTU, Ananthapur. ..... PETITIONER AND 1 Jawaharlal Nehru Technological University, Hyderabad Kukatpalli, Hyderabad, rep. by its Registrar. 2 Jawaharlal Nehru Technological University, Ananthapur, Ananthapur, Rep. by its Registrar. 3 Jawaharlal Nehru Technological University, Kakinad, Kakinada, Rep. by its Registrar. 4 The Government of Andhra Pradesh, rep. by its Secretary to Government, Department of Higher Education, Secretariat, Hyderabad. 5 The Andhra Pradesh State Council of Higher Education, Masab Tank, Hyderabad, rep. by its Chairman. ..RESPONDENTS Counsel for the Petitioner:MR.P.BALAJI VARMA Counsel for the Respondents: MR.K.RATHANGA PANI REDDY The Court made the following : O R D E R: This writ petition is filed by the petitioner feeling aggrieved by the action of respondent No.1 in taking undertaking from him as a condition for accepting his option to be posted in Jawaharlal Nehru Technological University, Hyderabad (for short “JNTUH”). When the writ petition came up for admission and hearing, Sri K.Rathanga Pani Reddy, learned Standing Counsel for respondent No.1, having regard to the tentative opinion expressed by this Court, took adjournment to impress upon respondent No.1 to take appropriate steps to resolve the issue. Accordingly, today, the learned Standing Counsel produced before this Court proceedings dated 25-03-2009, wherein the petitioner’s option was accepted and he is transferred to the Mechanical Engineering Branch of JNTUH. Since respondent No.1 has already passed an order as above, the cause in the writ petition does not survive for consideration. It is needless to observe that the petitioner’s transfer should be strictly governed by the option form of respondent No.1 without regard to the undertaking given by the petitioner. The writ petition is disposed of subject to the above observations. As a sequel to disposal of main petition, WPMP No.6549 of 2009 filed by the petitioner for interim relief is disposed of as infructuous. C.V.NAGARJUNA REDDY, J Dated 26th March, 2009 vrn