IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction) TUESDAY, THE TWENTY SECOND DAY OF FEBRUARY TWO THOUSAND AND FIVE PRESENT THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE GODA RAGHURAM WRIT PETITION NO : 17076 of 2003 Between: 1.B.Pattabireddy s/o Bodi Reddy R/o K.Buduguntapalli ( Vill & Post)., Rly.Kodur Mandal., Cuddapah District. 2.B.Ramanadha Reddy s/o Pattabi Reddy R/o K.Buduguntapalli (Vill.& Post) Rly, Kodur Mandal., Cuddapah District. 3 .B.Lakshmikar Reddy s/o Pattabireddy R/o K.Buduguntapalli (Vill. & Post)., Rly. Kodur Mandal., Cuddapah District. ..... PETITIONERS AND 1 The Pragathi Building Co-operative Society Ltd., rep.by its President Rly.Kodur, Cuddapah District. 2 The Co-operative Sub-registrar cum Recovery Officer., A.P.House Fed.Cuddapah., Cuddapah 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 will be pleased to issue a Writ of Mandamus, or any other appropriate Writ, Order or direction, declaring the action of the respondent authorities in not supplying the ledger extracts of the petitioners loan Nos.77,78 and 79 of the Ist respondent Society and proceeding to auction the property of the petitioners alone leaving others who have taken loan along with the petitioners as violative of Art.14 of the constitution of India, arbitrary, illegal, null and void and is against the principles of natural justice and norms of the public policy and contrary to the provisions of A.P.Co-operative Societies Act, and further directing the respondents to supply the ledger extracts of loan Nos.77,78 and 79 of the Ist respondent Society. Counsel for the Petitioner: MR.VENKATESWARA RAO GUDAPATI (NOT PRESENT) COUNSEL FOR THE RESPONDENT NO.1 : K.HEMALATHA COUNSEL FOR THE RESPONDENT NO.2: MR. T.SRIKANTH REDDY The Court made the following : ORAL ORDER There being no representation on behalf of the petitioners on 21- 02-2005, the writ petition was directed to be listed to th0is day under the caption “ for dismissal”. It is so listed. Even today there is no representation on behalf of the writ petitioners. The writ petition is accordingly dismissed for default. No order as to costs. ________________ GODA RAGHURAM,J 22ND FEBRUARY 2005 *TSNR To 1. The Co-operative Sub-registrar cum Recovery Officer., A.P.House Fed.Cuddapah., Cuddapah District. 2. Two C.D.Copies.