IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction) FRIDAY, THE FIRST DAY OF MAY TWO THOUSAND AND NINE PRESENT THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE R.SUBHASH REDDY WRIT PETITION NO : 1093 of 2008 Between: Sai Durga Seeds Rep.by its Proprietor, Sambari Shanker S/o.Chinnaiah, R/o.Metapally,Karimnagar Dist ..... PETITIONER AND 1 The Metapally Municipality Rep.by its Commissioner,Metpally,Karimnagar Dist 2 Sri Gangula Ashok S/o.Late Gangula Bhoomaiah, H.No.1-9-164, Main Road,Metapalli Post &(M), Karimnaga Dist .....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 o issue an order or direction more particularly one in the nature of writ of Mandamus or any other appropriate writ order or direction declaring the action of the respondent No.1 in not taking any action against the illegal construction of a wall obstructing the public street adjacent to the land in Sy.No.796 with the Municipal Limits of Metpally town, Karimnagar Dist considering the representation of the petitioner dt.29-9-2007 as arbitrary illegal null and void and violative of the principles of natural justice and also violative of the Articles 14,19,21 and also violative of provisions of the A.P Municipalities Act consequently direct the respondent No.1 to take necessary action against the illegal construction of a wall obstructing and occupying the public road, adjacent to the land in Sy.796 on the National High Way No.16 situated at Metpally Municipal Limits Considering the representation of the petitioner dt.29-9-2007 and as per the provisions of the A.P Municipalities Act Counsel for the Petitioner: MR. KAMTALA SRINIVAS (Not present) Counsel for the Respondent No.1: MR.POLISETTY RADHA KRISHNA (SC FOR MPL(TA) Counsel for the Respondent No.2 : MR.M.A.BARI The Court made the following : ORDER: This writ petition was listed for admission on 30-04-2009. As there was no representation for the petitioner, the matter was posted for dismissal. Today, although the matter is listed under the caption ‘for dismissal’, there is no representation on behalf of the petitioner. Hence, the writ petition is dismissed for non-prosecution. No order as to costs. R. SUBHASH REDDY, J 01-05-2009 ks/ktl