K.A. Abdul Gafoor, J.

The petitioner is a Tahsildar. He has approached this Court challenging Ext. P5 and seeking a direction commanding the respondents to retain him in the post of Taluk Tahsildar, Sultan Bathery till 30.9.1999, the date on which the petitioner is due to retire on superannuation. He had also filed an earlier original petition, No. 25351 of 1998 challenging the very same Ext. P5 and seeking a selfsame direction, not to

relieve the petitioner from the post of Taluk Tahsildar, Sultan Bathery till 30.9.1999. Additional challenge against Ext. P8 contained in a new original petition is only a consequential order to Ext. P5. Ext. P5 in both the original petitions are one and the same. The earlier original petition was dismissed as withdrawn as per my judgment dated 6.1.1999. Even before that date, the petitioner had filed this original petition seeking the same relief. As challenge against Ext. P5 had already been withdrawn, the petitioner cannot reagitate the said challenge against Ext. P5 again. Of course, there is a fresh challenge against Ext. P8. Ext. P8 is only a consequential arrangement pursuant to Ext. P5. Therefore, Ext. P8 has no separate existence

wi