Md.Hafeez Pasha v. The Government Of A.P.,

The Hon'ble Sri Justice C.V.Nagarjuna Reddy and The Hon'ble Smt. Justice Kongara Vijaya Lakshmi Writ Petition No.3136 of 2001 Date: 26.10.2017 Between:

Md.Hafeez Pasha and another ... Petitioners and The Govt. of A.P., Rep. by its Secretary Food and Civil Supplies Dept., Secretariat, Hyderabad and 3 others

...Respondents

Counsel for the Petitioners:

Mr.J.R.Manohar Rao Counsel for respondent Nos.3 & 4: Mr.N.Joy for Mr.J.Sudheer The Court made the following:

Order: (Per the Hon'ble Sri Justice C.V.Nagarjuna Reddy) The petitioners, who are not parties to OA.Nos.6119 and 6068 of 2000 filed by respondent Nos.3 and 4 respectively, filed this Writ Petition with leave, feeling aggrieved by Common Order, dated 18-10-2000, passed therein by the Andhra Pradesh Administrative Tribunal at Hyderabad (for short 'the Tribunal').

The petitioners claim that, at the time of filing this Writ Petition, they were working as Inspectors of Legal Meteorology under the control of respondent No.2. Apprehending that the impugned Order of the Tribunal may adversely affect their interests in the matter of promotion to the post of the District Inspector, they have filed this Writ Petition.

A perusal of the record shows that the request of respondent No.3 for her promotion was rejected vide proceedings, dated 11-02-1999, of respondent No.2 and the same was challenged by her before the Tribunal by filing OA.No.6119 of 2000. The Tribunal has disposed of the said

OA along with OA.No.6068 of 2000 filed by respondent No.4.

A perusal of the impugned Common Order shows that the aforesaid rejection order, dated 11-02-1999, was not interfered with. On the contrary, the Tribunal has directed that the extant rules notified under G.O.Ms.No.352, dated 07-03-1992, must be scrupulously followed. Further, the Tribunal has only directed the official respondents to consider the claims of respondent Nos.3 and 4 strictly in accordance with G.O.Ms.No.352, dated 07-03-1992, and also to protect the interests of any other persons, who are likely to be affected in the event respondent Nos.3 and 4 are promoted, by giving an opportunity of being heard to them. Having regard to the nature of the order passed by the Tribunal, which is impugned in this Writ Petition, we are of the opinion that it does not, in any manner, affect the interests of the petitioners. Moreover, at the hearing, it has come to our notice that both the petitioners as well as respondent Nos.3 and 4 have reached the age of superannuation. In the light of the above facts, it is not

necessary for this Court to adjudicate the issues raised in this Writ Petition on merits.

The Writ Petition is, accordingly, disposed of as infructuous.

As a sequel to disposal of the Writ Petition, Miscellaneous Petitions, pending if any, stand disposed of as infructuous.

______________________ (C.V.Nagarjuna Reddy, J) ________________________ (Kongara Vijaya Lakshmi, J) Dt: 26th October, 2017 lur