IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction) TUESDAY, THE TWENTY EIGHTH DAY OF APRIL TWO THOUSAND AND NINE PRESENT THE HON'BLE MS JUSTICE G.ROHINI WRIT PETITION NO : 13228 of 2007 Between: 1 Bollu VenkateshwaraRao S/o.Narasaiah R/o.Tallagudem village, Kamepalli Mandal Khammam District 2 The Tallagudem Grampanchayat, rep.by its Sarpanch, Smt.L.Rambai, W/o.Ram Babu R/o.Tallagudem village, Kamepalli Mandal Khammam District 3 N.AppaRao S/o.butchaiah society, R/o.Tallagudem village, Kamepalli Mandal Khammam District ..... PETITIONERS AND 1 The Commissioner of Intermediate Education, Andhra Pradesh, nampally, Station Road, Hyderabad 2 The Regional Joint Director of Intermediat Education Waranal 3 The Principal, Governmetn of Junior college, Kamepalli,Khammam District 4 Sri Narasimha Reddy S/o.not known age not known College, Kamepalli vilalge, Khammam 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 order or direction more particularly one in the nature of writ of Mandamus declaring the action of the respondents in taking steps for construction of the buildings at Kamepalli village for the purpose of government junior college, of the Kamepalli Mandal without construction of such building at Thallagudem village in the land donated by the petitioner No.1 for consequential shifting of the college is as illegal,irregular arbitary, and unsustainable and direct the respondents to construct the government college building in the land donated by the petitioner No.2 at thallagudem village, kamepalli Mandal, Khammam District and to shift the junior college to Thallagudem village. Counsel for the Petitioner: MR.P.VEERA REDDY Counsel for the Respondents: KUM.C.SINDHU KUMARI The Court made the following ORDER: THE HON’BLE MS JUSTICE G.ROHINI Writ Petition No.13228 of 2007 ORDER: As there was no representation for the petitioner on 23.04.2009, the matter is listed today under the caption ‘for dismissal’. Even today, none appears for the petitioner. Hence, the writ petition is dismissed for non- prosecution. No costs. _______________ 28.04.2009 VGB