IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction) MONDAY, THE TWENTY NINTH DAY OF NOVEMBER TWO THOUSAND AND FOUR PRESENT THE HON'BLE SRI DEVINDER GUPTA,THE CHIEF JUSTICE and THE HON'BLE MS JUSTICE G.ROHINI WRIT PETITION NO : 9953 of 1999 Between: HMT Satawahana Nagar Welfare Association, Regd.No.1611/90 Kukatpally, rep. by its Secretary, Sri B.Subash Chandra Bose Plot No,. 416, Kukatpally, R.R. District. ..... PETITIONER AND 1 Government of A.P,rep. by its Principal Secretary, Municipal Admn.& Urban Development (ELEC-II) Department, Secretariat, Hyderabad. 2 The Kukatpally Municipality, represented by its Special Officer, Kukatpally, Ranga Reddy District. .....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 an appropriate Writ, Order or Direction, particularly one in the nature of Writ of Mandamus, declaring that the GO.Ms.NO.180, Municipal Admn.& Urban Development (ELEC-II) Dept. dt. 20-4-1999 issued by the 1st respondent in merging the nine Municipalities contiguous to Municipal Corpn. of Hyderabad by calling it as Municipal Corpn. of Greater Hyderabad as arbitrary, contrary to law, not bonafide, in violation of principles of natural justice, leads to depriving of Presidential Order, contrary to the basic structure and provisions of the Constitutional set-up and in violation of Art. 14 & 21 of the Constitution of India; and consequently restore the earlier set-up of Municipalities; and pass such other order or orders as deemed fit and proper under the circumstance of the case. Counsel for the Petitioner:MR.P.SRIDHAR RAO Counsel for the Respondent No.1: GP FOR MUNCIPAL ADMN. & URBAN DEV. Counsel for the Respondent No.2: None The Court made the following Oral Order: (per Sri Devinder Gupta, CJ) Learned counsel for the petitioner had pointed out that the points raised in this writ petition are the same as in Writ Petition No. 9274 of 1999. The record of the said writ petition has been called. The said writ petition was withdrawn in view of the Government having withdrawn the impugned G.O. The same G.O. is the subject matter of the present writ petition and since the G.O. in question has since been withdrawn by the Government, learned counsel for the petitioner stated that he has instructions to withdraw the writ petition. The writ petition is accordingly dismissed as withdrawn. No costs. ____________________ DEVINDER GUPTA, CJ Date: 29th November, 2004 _________________ G. ROHINI, J Pnb To 1. The Principal Secretary, Municipal Admn.& Urban Development (ELEC- II) Department, Government of A.P, Secretariat, Hyderabad. 2. The Special Officer, Kukatpally Municipality, Kukatpally, Ranga Reddy District. 3. Two C.Cs. to the Government Pleader for Municipal Administration & Urban Development, High Court Buildings, Hyderabad. (OUT) 4. Two C.D. copies