IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction) TUESDAY, THE SECOND DAY OF JUNE TWO THOUSAND AND NINE PRESENT THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE C.V.NAGARJUNA REDDY WRIT PETITION No.9899 of 2009 Between: S.Ravi Raj S/o.Suryanarayana Raju R/o.G-3, Viswanath, Satyam Heights, Rajiv Gandhi Nagar, Nizampet Road, Bachupally, Ranga Reddy District. ..... PETITIONER AND 1 The Union of India, Represented by its Secretary, General Administration Department, New Delhi. 2 The Government of Andhra Pradesh, represented by its Secretary, General Administration Dept., Secretariat, Hyderabad. 3 The Traffic Police, represented by its Deputy Commissioner Hyderabad Traffic Police, Opp: Public Gardens, Hyderabad. .....RESPONDENTS Counsel for the Petitioner:PARTY-IN-PERSON ORDER: This writ petition is filed for the following substantive relief: “For the reasons stated in the accompanying affidavit, it is therefore prayed that this Hon’ble Court may be pleased to issue a Writ or Order more particularly one in the nature of Writ of Mandamus to declare that: a) "two years" instead of "one year" next to the phrase of "after the expiry of a period of" in 115 (7) of Central Motor Vehicles Rules, 1989; b) "one year" instead of " six months" next to the phrase of "the validity of the certificate shall be for" in 115 (7) of Central Motor Vehicles Rules, 1989; and consequently declare that fixing one year exception for possessing PUC certificate for new vehicles and fixing six months validity for PUC certificate is illegal, arbitrary.” After arguing the case for some time, the petitioner in person seeks permission of the Court to withdraw the writ petition. The request of the petitioner in person is accepted and the writ petition is dismissed as withdrawn. As a sequel to dismissal of main petition as withdrawn, WPMP.No.12843 of 2009 filed by the petitioner is disposed of as infructuous. C.V.NAGARJUNA REDDY, J 2nd JUNE, 2009. kvni