IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction) THURSDAY, THE TWENTY THIRD DAY OF APRIL TWO THOUSAND AND NINE PRESENT THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE N.V. RAMANA WRIT PETITION NO : 12890 of 2008 Between: 1 R. Lalith Mohan S/o. C. Rama Swamy, R/o.H.No.6-3-1100/1R,(III Floor), Tyagaraja Nagar, Somajiguda, Hyderabad-82. 2 Smt. Kanchana W/o. Abhimanyu Singh R/o.H.No. HIG-22/A, New Santosh Nagar Colony, Hyderabad. ..... PETITIONER(S) AND 1 The Government of Andhra Pradesh, rep. by its Principal Secretary, Municipal Administration & Urban Development Department, Secretariat, Hyderbad. 2 The Hyderabad Urban Development Authority, Hyderabad, rep. by its Vice Chariman. 3 The Greater Hyderabad Municipal Corporation, Hyderabad rep. by its Commissioner & Special Officer. 4 The Director of Town & Country Planning, Hyderabad. 5 The District Collector, Ranga Reddy District at 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 to issue a writ, order or direction more particularly one in the nature of Writ of Mandamus declaring the G.O.Ms.No.288, Municipal Administration & Urban Development (II) Department, Government of Andhra Pradesh, dated 03.04.2008 and the appended notification with regard to extensive modification carried out to the mster plan of Hyderabad Urban Development Area (excluding the erstwhile MCH area and newly extended area of HUDA) in so far as Item No.106 of Annexure- II mentioned in "D" i.e.,. other modifications of Appended notification issued by the 1st Respondent which was published in A.P. Gazetted extraordinary public issue dated 04.04.2008 as illegal, arbitrary, violative of principles of natural justice and contrary to the procedure contemplated under the provisions of A.P. Urban Area (Development) Act, 1975 r/w Urban Areas Development (Hyderabad) Rules, 1977 apart from violation of Articles 14 and 300-A of the Constitution of India and set aside the same. Counsel for the Petitioner:MR.K.VENUMADHAV Counsel for the Respondent : GP FOR MUNCIPAL ADMN. & URBAN DEV. FOR R GP FOR REVENUE FOR R MR.R.RADHA KRISHNA REDDY FOR R THE ADVOCATE GENERAL FOR RMAPP (SC FOR MCH CIRCLES 3&5)KALPANA EKBOTE FOR R M.DHANANJAY REDDY(SC FOR HUDA) FOR R28.06.08,VAK-2 The Court made the following : O R D E R:- The learned counsel for the petitioners seeks permission of this Court to withdraw the writ petition. Permission is accorded, and accordingly, the writ petition is dismissed as withdrawn. No costs. ______________ N.V.RAMANA, J 23rd April, 2009 bcj