IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction) THURSDAY, THE TWENTY FOURTH DAY OF APRIL TWO THOUSAND AND EIGHT PRESENT THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE V.ESWARAIAH WRIT PETITION No: 8710 of 2004 BETWEEN: Smt. Syeda Fatima Hussain W/o Syed Arif Hussain, Flat No. 101 & 102 1st Floor, Aga Enclave, Sultanpura, Hyderabad ... PETITIONER AND 1 Government of A.P., rep by Principal Secretary Agriculture & Cooperation Department, A.P., Secretariat, Hyderabad 2 Govt of A.P., rep by Principal Secretary, Home (General-B) Department, A.P., Secretaraiat, Hyderabad 3 Govt of A.P., rep by Secretary, Law & Legislation Department, A.P. Secretariat, Hyderabad 4 Government of A.P., rep by Additional Director General of Police, CID Hyderabad 5 Government of A.P., rep by Director General& Inspector General of Police, Hyderabad 6 Govt. of A.P., rep by Commissioner of Police, Hyderabad ...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 any appropriate Writ order or direction, preferably a Writ in the nature of Writ of mandamus declaring the G.O.Ms. No. 82 Home (General-B) Department dated 23-3-2002 issued by the 1st respondent and consequently Memo No. 6555/C24/CID/2002, dated 23-10-2003 issued by the 4th respondent and set aside the same as illegal, arbitrary, contrary to law and consequently to declare that further proceedings in Crl. M.P. Nos. 525/2002 and 1461/2002 in Crime No. 3/2002 on the file of the Special Court- cum-Metropolitan Sessions Judge, Nampally, Hyderabad as being null, void without jurisdiction. Counsel for the Petitioner: MR.MOHD.GULAM RASOOL Counsel for the Respondents: GP FOR HOME The Court made the following: ORDER: When the matter was taken up for hearing interlocutory application on 05.04.2005 none appeared for the petitioner, therefore, the WPMP.No.11256 of 2005 was dismissed. Thereafter, when the matter was listed for hearing on 17.04.2008 there was no representation on behalf of the petitioner, hence, the matter was directed to be listed under the caption ‘For Dismissal’. Today also when the matter is taken up for hearing, neither the petitioner appears nor there is any representation of his behalf. The writ petition is accordingly dismissed for default. There shall be no order as to costs. ______________ V. ESWARAIAH, J April 24, 2008 DSK