IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction) WEDNESDAY, THE TWENTY NINTH DAY OF JUNE TWO THOUSAND AND FIVE PRESENT THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE N.V. RAMANA WRIT PETITION No. 16468 of 2000 Between: Bandi Govinda Rao, S/o Late Venkashwarlu, R/o Vedadri Village, Post Jaggayyapet Mandal, Krishna District. ..... PETITIONER AND The Sub-Divisional Telecom Officer, Jaggayyapet, Krishna District. .....RESPONDENT 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 an appropriate writ, order or direction more particularly one in the nature of Writ of Mandamus declaring the action of respondent in issuing the communication P/52/SDOT/JGP/99-00/22 dt. 30.6.2000 as illegal, arbitrary, and consequently set- aside the same. Counsel for the Petitioner : Mr.V.BRAHMAIAH CHOWDARY (not present) Counsel for Respondent : Mr.A.RAJASHEKAR REDDY (ASST. SOLICITOR GENERAL) The Court made the following : ORDER: On 28.6.2005, when the matter has come up for consideration, learned counsel for the petitioner was absent and there was no representation on behalf of petitioner. Therefore, the matter was directed to be listed on 29.6.2005 under the caption ‘for dismissal’. Today when the matter is taken up for hearing in the forenoon, none appears for the petitioner. The matter was passed over and again taken up at 2.15 p.m., but none appears for the petitioner and there is no representation. The learned Standing Counsel appearing for respondents submits that no cause survives in this writ petition and it has become infructuous. Recording the submissions made by the learned counsel for the respondents, this Writ Petition is dismissed as having become infructuous. No order as to costs. ______________ N.V.RAMANA, J Date: 29.6.2005 DA To 1. The Sub-Divisional Telecom Officer, Jaggayyapet, Krishna District. 2. Two CD copies.