IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction) MONDAY, THE FIRST DAY OF DECEMBER TWO THOUSAND AND EIGHT PRESENT THE HON'BLE MS JUSTICE G.ROHINI WRIT PETITION No : 9598 of 2005 Between: Pogarthi Kotaiah, S/o. Bullaiah, Plot.No.40, Pasigutta, PadmaraoNagar, Secunderabad. ..... PETITIONER AND 1 The Commissioner, Department of Endowments, Hyderabad. 2 The Deputy Commissioner, Department of Endowments, Kishanpura, Hanamkonda, Waragal District. 3 The Manager, Sri Musalamma Jathara, Gunjedu, Gunjedu Village, Kothaguda Mandal, Warangal District. 4 Sri Kolipaka Sadananda, S/o. Narasaiah, Sadireddipalli Village, Kothaguda Mandal, Warangal 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 or Order or Direction, more particularly one in the nature of Writ of Mandamus declaring the action of the Manager, Sri Musalamma Jathar, Gunjedu Village, Kothaguda Mandal,Warangal District i.e., the 3rd respondent herein in conducting an auction on 06.04.2005 from 11.00 A.M., onwards for collection of Talaneelalu (Collection of Human Hair) for the period w.e.f.16.04.2005 to 15.04.2006 in pursuance of the auction notification dt.29.03.2005 as arbitrary, illegal and violative of Articles 14 & 19 (1) (g) of the Constitution of India and consequently set aside the contract awarded in favour of the 4th respondent as he failed to comply with the condition No.5 of the terms and conditions of the auction in depositing the entire bid amount within one week from the date of auction and pass such other order or orders. as this Hon'ble Court may deem fit and proper in the circumstances of the case. Counsel for the Petitioner: MR.P.KESAVA RAO Counsel for the Respondent No.: GP FOR ENDOWMENTS The Court made the following : THE HON’BLE Ms. JUSTICE G. ROHINI WRIT PETITION No. 9598 of 2005 O R D E R: Learned counsel for the petitioner states that the cause in the writ petition does not survive for adjudication. Accordingly, the writ petition is dismissed as infructuous. No costs. ______________ G. ROHINI,J Date: 01-12-2008 KLP