THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE B.PRAKASH RAO AND THE HON’BLE Dr. JUSTICE G.YETHIRAJULU W.A.No.2104 of 2005 JUDGMENT: (Per the Hon’ble Sri Justice B.Prakash Rao) Heard Sri K. Jayaprakash Rao, learned counsel for the appellant and Sri V.T.M. Prasad, learned Standing counsel for the respondents herein. At the request of both the counsel, the main writ appeal itself is taken up for disposal. The unsuccessful writ petitioner is the appellant herein, who seeks to assail the order dated 29-08-2005 in W.P.No.2310 of 1998 filed against the orders dated 31-10-1994, 21-04-1995, 26-04-1995, 30-09-1996 and 20-06-1997, which was dismissed mainly on the ground that one writ petition against so many causes of action is not maintainable. The main submission made on behalf of the appellant is that in fact on the date, when the matter was disposed of, the learned counsel was not present and that apart, the writ itself has to be restricted against one order instead of dismissing the same. Having heard the learned counsel on either side and on perusal of the material, it is seen that there is no consideration of the matter on merits. The writ petition was dismissed only in view of the fact that in the prayer, the petitioner has sought to assail so many orders. As rightly pointed out, a single writ petition is not maintainable against all such orders. However, the learned counsel for the appellant fairly submits that he wants to restrict the prayer in the writ petition only against the orders dated 30-09-1996 passed by the third respondent and dated 20-06-1997 passed by the second respondent. In view of the same, the matter requires reconsideration afresh. The writ appeal is, accordingly, allowed and the impugned order is set aside. The writ petition shall be treated as against the orders dated 30-09-1996 and 20-06- 1997. Office is directed to post the writ petition before the learned single Judge for disposal in accordance with law. ________________ B.PRAKASH RAO, J __________________ Dr.G.YETHIRAJULU, J Date:08-11-2005 YCR