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 : 3327 of 2008 Between: Syed Mubarizuddin Qadri S/o. Late Syed Ali Qadri Permanent R/o. H.No.6-2-140, Akber Bagh, Malakpet, Hyderabad, rep. by his G.P.A. Holder, Syed Abdullah Quadri @khaled, aged about 48 years, Occ. business, R/o. H.No.16-2-140, Akber Bagh, Malakpet, Hyderabad. ..... PETITIONER AND 1 The Greater Hyderabad Municipal Corporation, Rep. by its Chief Commissioner, Officer at Municipal Complex, Tankbund Road, Hyderabad. 2 The Greater Hyderabad Municipal Corporation, Rep. by its Asst. City Planner (Town Planning Section), Circle No.I, Charminar East, sardar Mahal, Hyderabad. 3 The Greater Hyderabad Municipal Corporation, Rep. by Deputy Commissioner, Circle No.I, Chairman East, Sardar Mahal, Hyderabad. 4 Syed Tajuddin Qadri, S/o. Late Syed Ali Qadri, R/o. H.No.16-2-140/B/1, Akber Bag, Malakpet, Hyderabad. .....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 issue any writ or direction more particularly one in the nature of writ of mandamus directing the respondent nos.1 to 3 to consider the representations of the petitioner on 13.11.2007, 11.09.2007 and 28.01.2008 and consequently direct the respondents no. 1 to 3 to take steps for removing the illegal construction of premises bearing Municipal No.16-2-140/B/1 (old portion of H.No.16-2-140), situated at Akbar Bagh, Malakpet, Hyderabad, A.P. Counsel for the Petitioner: MR.VIKHAR AHMED (Not Present) Counsel for the Respondent Nos.1 to 3: R.RADHA KRISHNA REDDY (SC FOR GHMC, SNCZONE) Counsel for the Respondent No.4 : MR.ZIA-UL-HAQ. 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