THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE C.V.NAGARJUNA REDDY Writ Petition No.5016 of 2009 Dated 20th April, 2011 Between: Munugu Dileep Kumar …Petitioner And The Commissioner for Prohibition & Excise, Hyderabad and others …Respondents Counsel for the petitioner: Sri O.Manoher Reddy Counsel for respondent Nos.1 & 3: AGP for Prohibition & Excise Counsel for respondent No.4: Sri P.Venu Gopal The Court made the following: ORDER: At the interlocutory stage, the writ petition is taken up for hearing and disposal with the consent of the learned counsel for the parties. This writ petition is filed for the following substantive relief: “…to issue a writ of mandamus or any other appropriate writ or direction declaring the action of respondents 2 and 3 in measuring the distance as provided under Rule 6 upto the 2nd floor of the proposed premises of the 4th respondent bar and restaurant as illegal, arbitrary and contrary to Rule 6 of the A.P.Excise (Grant of licence of selling by bar and conditions of licence) Rules, 2005 and consequently direct respondents 2 and 3 to measure the distance prescribed in Rule 6 from Bhanu Nursing Home Eye Hospital to the Ground Floor of the proposed premises of the 4th respondent herein for opening of a bar and restaurant.” At the hearing, Sri O.Manoher Reddy, learned counsel for the petitioner, submitted that the subject matter of the writ petition has become infructuous. Accordingly, the writ petition is dismissed as infructuous. As a sequel to dismissal of the writ petition, W.P.M.P.No.6564 of 2009 is disposed of as infructuous. C.V.NAGARJUNA REDDY, J 20th April, 2011 VGB