IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction) MONDAY, THE TENTH DAY OF NOVEMBER TWO THOUSAND AND EIGHT PRESENT THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE B.SESHASAYANA REDDY WRIT PETITION NO : 23550 of 2008 Between: Smt. Mullapudi Kalpana W/o. M. Venkata Ramana R/o. 16-11-511/9/222, Street No.9, Moosarambagh, Hyderabad - 500 036. ..... PETITIONER AND 1 The Government of India, Ministry of Communication & I.T. Department of Telecommunications (Estate Section) by its Director (S.R.) New Delhi. 2 The Chairman & Managing Director, Bharath Sanchar Nigam Ltd., Statesman House, New Delhi. 3 The General Manager, Bharath Sanchar Nigam Ltd., Chandramouli Nagar, Guntur. .....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, order or direction in the nature of Writ of Mandamus declaring the inaction of the respondents No.2 and 3 herein in not furnishing the names of 3 senior oﬃcers of S.A.G. level who can be appointed as an Arbitrator under Clause 17 of the Lease Agreement dated 22.01.2003 between the petitioner and the 3rd respondent as required by the letter dated 22.01.2008 of the 1st respondent is illegal, unjust, arbitrary and violative of articles 14 and 21 of the Constitution of India. Counsel for the Petitioner:MR.E.V.BHAGIRATHA RAO Counsel for the Respondent No.: MS.P.SARADA The Court made the following : ORDER This writ petition has been ﬁled by Mullapudi Kalpana assailing the action of the respondents in not appointing Arbitrator under Clause 17 of the Lease Agreement dated 22.1.2003. When the writ petition came up for admission, Sri K.Mohan, learned standing counsel of BSNL ﬁled counter- aﬃdavit on behalf of the third respondent wherein it is stated that the name of Sri P.V.Muralidhar, General Manager (West), Hyderabad has been proposed as Arbitrator vide letter dated 26.09.2008. Since the Arbitrator has been appointed, the relief sought for in this writ petition has become infructuous. Accordingly, the writ petition is dismissed as infructuous. No costs. __________ 10-11-2008 rkk