IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction) TUESDAY, THE SEVENTH DAY OF JULY TWO THOUSAND AND NINE PRESENT THE HON'BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE AND THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE RAMESH RANGANATHAN Writ Petition No.28072 of 2008 Between: 1) Mohd Gaziuddin Iqbal S/o. Late Mohd Ghayasuddin H.No.17-2-4 Yakutupura Chavini Road Hyderabad-500023 2) Oamarunnisa Begum W/o. Late Osman Sheriff H.No.17-2-4/15 Yakutupura Chavini Road Hyderabad-500023 3) Abdul Barri S/o.Abedkhan H.No.17-2-4/A Yakutupura Chavini Road Hyderabad-500023 4) Mohd Ayaz Ahmed S/o.Mohd Iqbal H.No.17-2-4 Yakutupura Chavini Road Hyderabad-500023 5) Mohd Zainulabuddin S/o.Mohd Iqbal H.No.17-2-4 Yakutupura Chavini Road Hyderabad-500023 6) Mohd Naseerduddin D/o.Ghasisuddin Iqbal H.No.17-8-24opp Saw Mill Yakutupura Chavini Road Hyderabad- 500023 ... PETITIONERS AND 1) The Asst Engineer A.P C.P.D.C.L Electricity Board Yakuthpura Hyderabad-23 2) The Forest Range Officer Aryan N BhavanSaifabad Hyderabad 3) The Greater Hyderabad Municipal Corporation Rep.by Commissioner cum Special Officer Tank Bund Hyderabad 4) Gaffaruddin S/o Late Md. Gayasuddin, R/o H.No. 17-2-4/1, Yakutpura, Chavani Road,Hyd ...RESPONDENTS 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 pass an order more in the nature of writ of Mandamus declaring the inaction of the respondent Nos. 1 to 3 not disconnecting the electricity supply Sc No.R2014576 and not seizing the saw Mill and closing permanently run by the 4th respondent. Counsel for the Petitioner: R.T.V.RAJEEVAN Counsel for Respondent No.1 MR.O.MANOHER REDDY Counsel for Respondent No.2: GP FOR FORESTS Counsel for Respondent No.3: MR.SURESH SHIV SAGAR Counsel for Respondent No.4: MR.R. RADHAKRISHNA REDDY, SC FOR GHMC The Court made the following: ORAL ORDER: (per Hon’ble the Chief Justice) 1. This is a public interest litigation wherein it has been alleged that respondent No.4 is having a saw-mill, which results into pollution and respondent No.1 is supplying electricity to the saw-mill so as to enable respondent No.4 to do the business of running saw-mill. 2. Learned advocate, Shri O. Manohar Reddy, appearing for respondent No.1 Electricity Board has submitted that electricity supply to the saw-mill has been disconnected so as to see that respondent No.4 does not do the business of running saw-mill. 3. In view of the above development in the matter, the grievance ventilated in the petition has been redressed and, therefore, the petition is disposed of with no order as to costs. ANIL R. DAVE, CJ July 07, 2009 RAMESH RANGANATHAN, J svs ..... REGISTRAR // TRUE COPY // SECTION OFFICER To 1) 2 CD copies Form-NIC-OGS/WP{BMR}