IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction) FRIDAY, THE TWENTY SIXTH DAY OF JUNE TWO THOUSAND AND NINE PRESENT THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE B.SESHASAYANA REDDY WRIT PETITION NO : 11060 of 2004 Between: Aided Upper Primary School, rep., by its Correspondent Y.Visweswara Rao, s/o late Krishna Murthy, r/o Ichapuram, Srikakulam District. ..... PETITIONER AND 1 The Commissioner/Director of School Education, A.P.,Hyderabad. 2 The District Educational Officer, Srikakulam, Srikakulam 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 may be pleased to issue a writ, order or direction more particularly a writ in the nature of mandamus under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, though the 2nd respondent is Competent Authority as per G.O.Ms.No.1, Edn.(P.S.2), dt.1-1-1994 for approving of the proposal for surrendering of seven posts, but the 1st respondent by issuing proceeding Lr.Rc.No.153/Bi/2003, dt.29-8-2003 instead of disposing of the proposal pending before him recommended the Government take away all the aided posts and run the school without aid. Therefore, the said impugned proceedings which is beyond the scope of the jurisdiction by deviating the subject matter. Therefore, declaring the proceeding Lr.Rc.No.153/Bi/2003, dt.29-8-2003 issued by the 1st respondent as illegal improper and hereby set aside consequently the 2nd respondent has alone competent to disposal of proposal submitted by the management. Counsel for the Petitioner: SMT.A.PADMA Counsel for the Respondents.: GP FOR EDUCATION The Court made the following : O R D E R : When this writ petition came up for hearing on 23.06.2009, there was no representation on behalf of the petitioner and therefore, it was directed to be listed on 26.06.2009 under the caption ‘for dismissal’. Despite the matter being listed under the caption ‘for dismissal’ on this day, there is no representation on behalf of the petitioner. It indicates that the petitioner is not interested in pursuing this writ petition. Accordingly, the writ petition is dismissed for non-prosecution. No costs. ______________________ B.SESHASAYANA REDDY, J. Date:26th June, 2009. cs ..... ASSISTANT REGISTRAR // TRUE COPY // SECTION OFFICER To 1. 2. 2CD copies Form-NIC-OGS/WP{VSMI}