IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction) MONDAY, THE TENTH DAY OF SEPTEMBER TWO THOUSAND AND SEVEN PRESENT THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE C.Y.SOMAYAJULU WRIT PETITION No.33086 OF 1997 Between: D.Pullam Raju .... PETITIONER AND The State of Andhra Pradesh, Rep. by its Secretary to Government, Social Welfare Department, Secretariat Buildings, Hyderabad, And others. ....RESPONDENTS THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE C.Y.SOMAYAJULU WRIT PETITION NO.33086 OF 1997 O R D E R No representation on behalf of the petitioner on 12.02.2007 when the matter came up before a learned Judge. The then counsel for the petitioner represented that he had given up his vakalat and that the petitioner had taken away the bundle from him. So, the learned Judge directed the Registry to issue notice to the petitioner to engage another counsel. As notice was not served on the petitioner, a Division Bench of this Court had on 07.06.2007 directed the Registry to issue notice to the petitioner through the Court of the District Judge. The Registry put up a note stating that the envelop sent to the petitioner is returned with an endorsement that the addressee is not known. When the writ petitioner takes away the bundle from the counsel, it is his duty to entrust the case to another counsel and prosecute the case. It is no part of the duty of the court to inform the writ petitioner about the date of hearing, at the cost of the exchequer, more so, when he filed the writ petition to protect his personal rights. If a writ petitioner who takes away the bundle from his counsel, does not instruct another advocate and prosecute his case, he has to suffer the consequences therefor. Therefore, the writ petition deserves to be and hence is dismissed for non-prosecution. No costs. ------------------------------------ JUSTICE C.Y.SOMAYAJULU 10th SEPTEMBER, 2007 PGS THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE C.Y.SOMAYAJULU W.P.NO.33086 OF 1997 10th SEPTEMBER, 2007