IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction) TUESDAY, THE TWENTY FOURTH DAY OF JUNE TWO THOUSAND AND EIGHT PRESENT THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE C.V.NAGARJUNA REDDY WRIT PETITION NO : 14973 of 2005 Between: Sri Kanaka Mahalaxmi Technoysos Acqua Minerals and Foods, N.H.5 Near Sir SIRR Engineering College, Eluru, West Godavari District rep., by its Proprietor Dr.B.Nirmala devi, w/o Dr.B.Shivarama rao, aged 52 years r/o Kanaka Mahalaxmi Hospital, R.R.Pet, Eluru, West Godavari District. ..... PETITIONER AND 1 The District Collector, West Godavari District, Eluru. 2 The Joint Collector, West Godavari District Eluru. 3 The Revenue Divisional Officer, Eluru, West Godavari District. 4 The Mandal Revenue Officer, Eluru, West Godavari District. 5 The Municipality, Eluru, West Godavari District rep., by its Commissioner. 6 The Food Inspector (Prevention of Food Adulteration) Preventive Medicines, Kottadibba, Eluru, West Godavari District. .....RESPONDENTS Counsel for the Petitioner: MR.HARI SREEDHAR Counsel for the Respondents : GP FOR REVENUE The Court made the following : O R D E R: This writ petition is filed for the following substantive relief: “The petitioner, therefore, prays that this Hon’ble Court may, in the interests of justice, be pleased to issue such appropriate writ, order or direction to the respondents, more particularly one in the nature of mandamus declaring the action of the respondents in directing the petitioner to close its packaged drinking water unit situated at N.H.5, Eluru and threatening to seize the same if not closed as desired by them without any notice though the petitioner is not marketing packaged drinking water for drinking purpose, as arbitrary, illegal, without authority and as such violative of Article 14 of the Constitution of IINdia apart from violative of principles of natural justice.” At the hearing, Sri J.Visveswarudu, learned counsel representing Sri Hari Sreedhar, learned counsel for the petitioner, submitted that the writ petition has become infructuous. Hence, the writ petition is dismissed as infructuous. As a sequel to dismissal of main petition as infructuous, WPMP No.14200 of 2006 filed by the petitioner for interim relief is also dismissed. C.V.NAGARJUNA REDDY,J Dated 24th June, 2008 vrn C.V.NAGARJUNA REDDY,J Dated 24th June, 2008 vrn