IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD MONDAY, THE FOURTH DAY OF JULY TWO THOUSAND AND FIVE PRESENT THE HON'BLE SRI BILAL NAZKI, THE ACTING CHIEF JUSTICE and THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE G.CHANDRAIAH WRIT APPEAL NO : 1214 of 2005 & WRIT PETITION No. 11544 of 2005 WRIT APPEAL NO : 1214 of 2005 (Writ Appeal under Clause 15 of the Letters Patent against the Order dated 10/06/2005 in WVMP No.1384 of 2005 in WPMP No. 14770 of 2005 in WP NO : 11544 OF 2005 on the file of the High Court.) Between: Y. Krishna, S/o Y. Chandraiah, R/o H.No. 4-8-312, Gowliguda, Hyderabad. ..... APPELLANT AND 1 The A.P. Commission for Backward Classes, 8th Floor, Chandra Vihar, M.J. Road, Nampally, Hyderabad, Rep. by its Member Secretary. 2 The Government of Andhra Pradesh, Rep. by its Principal Secretary, Backward Classes Welfare Department, Secretariat Buildings, Hyderabad. RESPONDENTS Counsel for the Appellant:MR.L.RAVICHANDER Counsel for the Respondents: GP FOR SOCIAL WELFARE Counsel for the Petitioner:MR.P.SUBASH Counsel for the Respondents: GP FOR SOCIAL WELFARE The Court made the following : COMMON ORDER: (per the Hon’ble Sri Bilal Nazki, ACJ) The writ petition was filed seeking a direction that Respondent No. 1 should not file a report as some copies of certain documents were not made available to the petitioners by Respondent No.1. An interim order was passed by the learned single judge directing the 1st respondent to furnish the material sought by the petitioner. This order was vacated when a vacate stay petition was filed by an order of this Court on 10.6.2005. Appeal has been filed against that order. In the meantime, it is noticed that the 1st respondent gave a report which was consequently accepted by the Government, which resulted in issuing of an Ordinance. As such, the present writ petition has become infructuous and no further orders can be passed in the writ petition and is accordingly dismissed. But, however, Mr. L. Ravichander, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the appellant-writ petitioner submits that since the final Ordinance has also been challenged, the grounds taken in the writ petition may also be permitted to be taken before the appropriate Court in which the Ordinance has been challenged. We are making it clear that we are not giving any finding on the issues raised in the writ petition and issues if any can be raised by the petitioner in case he has filed any writ petition challenging the Ordinance. In view of the dismissal of the writ petition as having become infructuous, the writ appeal also fails and the same is accordingly dismissed. No costs. _________________ BILAL NAZKI, ACJ DATE: 4th July, 2005 ________________ G. CHANDRAIAH,J pnb To 1 The Member Secretary, A.P. Commission for Backward Classes, 8th Floor, Chandra Vihar, M.J. Rad, Nampally, Hyderabad, 2 The Principal Secretary, Backward Classes Welfare Department, Government of Andhra Pradesh, Secretariat Buildings, Hyderabad. 3 Two C.Cs. to the Government Pleader for Social Welfare, High Court Buildings, Hyderabad. (OUT) 4 Two C.D. copies