IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD MONDAY, THE FIFTEENTH DAY OF SEPTEMBER TWO THOUSAND AND EIGHT PRESENT THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE B.PRAKASH RAO and THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE R. KANTHA RAO WRIT APPEAL NO : 948 of 2008 (Writ Appeal under Clause 15 of the Letters Patent against the Order dated 28/04/2008 in WP NO : 8355 OF 2008 on the file of the High Court.) Between: Karvy Global Services Limited,A Company incorporated under the Companies Act,1956, having its registered office at "Karvy House" 46,Avenue 4,Street No.1, Banjara Hills, Hyderabad-500034, rep.by its Authorised Signatory Mr.Uma Maheswara Reddy,S/o.late Sri M.Thimma Reddy, aged 44 years, Resident of Hyderabad ..... APPELLANT AND 1 The Government of Andhra pradesh, rep.by its Special Chief Secretary to the Government, Home Department secretariat, Hyderabad 2 The Commissioner of Police, Hyderabad City Police Basheerbagh,Hyderabad 3 The Assistant Commissioner of Police, Banjara Hills Hyderabad 4 The Station House officer, Banjara Hills, Hyderabad 5 Limra Constructions, having its office at 8-2-596,Road No.10 Banjara Hills, Hyderabad-500034 .....RESPONDENT(S) Counsel for the Appellant:MR.S.RAVI Counsel for the Respondent No.: GP FOR HOME The Court made the following : THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE B.PRAKASH RAO and THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE R. KANTHA RAO WRIT APPEAL NO : 948 of 2008 JUDGMENT: (Per Sri Justice B Prakash Rao) Heard the learned counsel for petitioner and learned counsel for respondents and at their request the appeal is taken up for disposal at the admission stage. The appellant herein is unsuccessful writ petitioner, who sought writ of mandamus inter-alia seeking a direction against respondents 1 to 4 to take steps to stop the illegal construction being carried out by 5th respondent at premises bearing no. 8-2- 596, Road No. 1, Banjara Hills, Hyderabad. The learned Single Judge after contest by the respondents herein did not ﬁnd favour with the grievance of the appellant and dismissed the writ petition especially taking note of the directions which have been given by this Court in W.P. No. 21362 of 2002. Hence, the present appeal. During the course of hearing, learned counsel for 5th respondent submitted that there is no excavation being undertaken using explosives and that he has ﬁled a counter affidavit to that effect. Having regard to the speciﬁc statement that no excavation work is being undertaken using explosives, nothing survives in the appeal. Accordingly, the same is dismissed. No costs. ________________ B.PRAKASH RAO,J _______________ R. KANTHA RAO,J DATE:15.9.2008 Tvk THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE B.PRAKASH RAO and THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE R. KANTHA RAO WRIT APPEAL NO : 948 of 2008 Date: 15.9.2008