IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction) MONDAY, THE ELEVENTH DAY OF MARCH TWO THOUSAND AND EIGHT PRESENT THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE C.V.NAGARJUNA REDDY WRIT PETITION NO.8095 of 2007 Between: 1. Srirama Narayana Rao S/o. Narasimha Murthy R/o. H.No. 18/65, Sukarlabada, Machilipatnam, Krishna District. 2. Srirama Venkata Durga Prasad S/o. Sri Rama Narayana Rao R/o. H.No. 18/65, Sukarlabada, Machilipatnam, Krishna District. ..... PETITIONERS AND 1. Andhra Pradesh Industrial Infrastructure Corporation, Rep. by its Vice Chairman and Managing Director, H.No. 5-9-58/8, 6th Floor, Parishrama Bhavan, Basheerbagh, Hyderabad-500 029. 2. Zonal Manager, A.P.I.I.C. Zonal Office, Industrial Estate, Patamata, Vijayawada-520 029 ..... RESPONDENTS Counsel for the Petitioner:MR.V.V.L.N.SARMA Counsel for the Respondent No.: MR.K.V.SIMHADRI THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE C.V. NAGARJUNA REDDY *** WRIT PETITION NO. 8095 of 2007 O R D E R : This writ petition is filed for the following substantive relief: … “the Hon’ble Court may be pleased to issue a writ of Mandamus or any other appropriate writ, order or direction declaring the orders of the 2nd Respondent in Lr.No. ZM/APIIC/AN/MTM/MTM/P.45/02/171 and 170 dated 10-5-2006 and Lr.No. ZM/APIIC/AN/MTM/P.45/1234 dated 15-3-2007 as illegal, arbitrary etc., with a consequential direction to the Respondents to execute the necessary documents in their favour in respect of plot No. 45 & 46 in Auto Nagar, Machilipatnam Krishna District and grant such other just and consequential relief or reliefs as this Hon'ble Court may deem fit and proper in the circumstances of the case.” 2. Sri V.V.L.N. Sarma, the learned counsel for the petitioner seeks permission of this Court to withdraw the writ petition in terms of letter dated 21-1-2008 filed in the Registry. 3. On perusal of the letter shows that Respondent No.1 registered the plots in favour of the petitioners, and therefore, the petitioners seek withdrawal of the writ petition with liberty to approach this Court if and when necessary. 4. The request of the learned counsel is accepted and the writ petition is dismissed as withdrawn in terms of the prayer made. 5. As a sequel to disposal of the writ petition, WPMP.No.10390 of 2007 filed by the petitioner seeking interim relief is dismissed as infructuous. ​ _________________________ 11-3-2008 C.V. NAGARJUNA REDDY, J. I s L