G. Yesther Rani, v. The Ap Power Generation Corp. Ltd.,

Date: 10.07.2017 Between:

G Yesther Rani W/o G. Venkateswarlu, 39 years, R/o. H.No.8-1-99/2, Gattayigudem, New Paloncha, Khammam District.

.... Petitioner AND The A.P.Power Generation Corporation Limited, Vidyut Soudha, Hyderabad, rep.by its Managing Director and two others.

.... Respondents The Court made the following:

ORDER:

This writ petition is filed praying to grant the following relief:

"to issue any appropriate writ or order or direction more particularly one in the nature of writ of mandamus declaring the action of the respondents in not appointing the petitioner as Sub-Engineer on preferential basis over the other direct recruits, based on her Apprenticeship service as per the Judgment reported in AIR 1995 SC 1115 and in terms of the order dated 29-09-99 in WP No. 20264/99 and as per the assurance given in the Lr/No. CEE/O & M/KTPS/V/PO/ Adm/W.P.No.20264/99/D.No.405/2000, dt. 12.01.2000, as arbitrary illegal and violative of Article 14, 16 and 21 of the Constitution of India and consequently direct the respondents to appoint the petitioner as Sub-Engineer on preferential basis in terms of the order dt. 29/09/1999 in WP No. 20264/99 and as per the assurance given in the Lr. No. CEE/O & M/KTPS/V/PO/Adm/W.P. No. 20264 /99/D.No. 405/2000, dt.12-01-2000, by considering petitioner's representation dt. 20-01-2011 ... "

2. While admitting the writ petition Court directed consideration of the case of the petitioner if he is qualified in pursuance of the notification dated 05.01.2011 and he be given preference. In consideration of the interim order passed by the Court, the claim of the petitioner was considered and she was informed that she was not qualified in terms of the notification dated 05.01.2011.

3. Earlier petitioner filed C.C.No.1588 of 2011 alleging violation of the directions issued by this Court on 16.06.2011. However, Court was informed that assessment was made and she was found not suitable. Recording the same, contempt case was closed by order dated 22.03.2012.

4. The prayer sought in the writ petition was, to consider the claim of the petitioner by giving preference to her. By virtue of interim order, the claim of the petitioner was considered and she was found not suitable and, therefore, cause in the writ petition does not survive and the writ petition is accordingly dismissed. It is open to the petitioner to work out her remedies as available in law.

Miscellaneous petitions pending, if any, shall stand closed. There shall be no order as to costs.

__________________________ JUSTICE P.NAVEEN RAO Date : 10.07.2017 kkm

Date: 10.07.2017 kkm