IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction) WEDNESDAY, THE TWENTY FOURTH DAY OF JUNE TWO THOUSAND AND NINE PRESENT THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE B.SESHASAYANA REDDY WRIT PETITION NO : 5758 of 2005 Between: 1 S. Anki Reddy , S/o. Pedda Anki Reddy, Maharshi Vidya Mandir, Proddutoor , Kaddapa Dirstrict 2 P. Peddi Reddy, S/O. yerikala Reddy, Maharshi Vidya Niketan(TM) High school,Kadapa, Kadapa Dirstrict. ..... PETITIONERS AND 1 The State of Andra pradesh rep.by its Secretary to Education Department,Secretarist Builieings, Hyderabad 2 The Director of School Education, Andra pradesh, Hyderabad. 3 The District Educational Officer, Kadapa Dirstrict, at Kadapa. 4 The Regional Joint Director, Of School Education, Kadapa, Kadapa District. 5 The Correspondent, Maharshi Vidya Mandir, Maharshi Vidya Nikethan (TM) High School , Proddutoor, Kadapa District. .....RESPONDENTS Petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying that in the circumstances stated in the Affidavit filed herein the High Court may be pleased to issue an order or direction more in the nature of writ of Mandamus directing the High Level committee respondent by the 2nd respondent to consider and recommend the un-aided teacher posts of the petitioner 's School and admit them into grant-in-aid on the proposals to be sent bty the 3rd respondent and consequently direct the 1st respondent to admit the un-aided posts of the petitioners into grant in petitioners and also extend the benefit of various orders of this Hon'ble court to the petitioners also granted in favour of similar placed persons and pass such other and further order or orders as this Hon' ble court deem fit and p roper in the circumstances of the case. Counsel for the Petitioners: MR.POODATTU AMARENDER Counsel for the Respondent Nos.1&2: GP FOR EDUCATION The Court made the following : O R D E R : When this writ petition came up for hearing on 10.06.2009, there was no representation on behalf of the petitioners. Even on this day also, there is no representation on behalf of the petitioners. It indicates that the petitioners are not interested in pursuing this writ petition. Accordingly, the writ petition is dismissed for non-prosecution. No costs. ______________________ B.SESHASAYANA REDDY, J. Date:24th June, 2009. cs ..... ASSISTANT REGISTRAR // TRUE COPY // SECTION OFFICER To 1. 2. 2CD copies Form-NIC-OGS/WP{VSMI}