IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction) TUESDAY, THE SIXTH DAY OF OCTOBER TWO THOUSAND AND NINE PRESENT THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE N.V. RAMANA WRIT PETITION NO : 19679 of 2008 Between: Ch. Sudhakar Reddy S/o. Ch. Ram REddy R/o. Gowraram (V), Thelkapalli (M), Mahabubnagar District. ..... PETITIONER AND 1 The Commissioner, Rural Development, D.No. 5-10-192, 2nd Floor, HUDA, Heritage Office Complex, Hill Fort Road, Saifabad, Hyderabad. 2 The Project Director, DWMA, Mahabubnagar, Mahabubnagar District. 3 The District Collector-cum-Chairman, DWMA, Mahabubnagar, Mahabubnagar District. .....RESPONDENT(S) 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 an appropriate writ, order or direction more particularly one in the nature of Writ of Mandamus declaring the action of the respondents in failing to take action pursuant to the representation dt. 10- 03-2008 made to the respondent No.1 in spite of repeated request made earlier to the respondents and reports called for on 15-12-2007 for taking action to close the breach to the check dam in Gowraram Village, Thelkapalli Mandal of Mahabubnagar District as illegal, arbitrary and violative of principles of natural justice and consequently direct the respondents to forthwith initiate action pursuant to the latest representation dt. 10-3-2008 by duly considering the proceedings of the 1st respondent in Memo No. 6441/RD.V(2)/2007 dt. 15.12.2007 for closing the breach to the check dam and to take action against the culprits in the interest of justice. Counsel for the Petitioner:MR.C.HARI PREETH Counsel for the Respondent No.: GP FOR PANCHAYAT RAJ & RURAL DEV. The Court made the following : O R D E R:- This writ petition is filed seeking a mandamus to declare the action of the respondents in failing to take action to close the breach to the check dam in Gowraram village, Thelkapalli Mandal, Mahabubnagar District in spite of the representation dated 10.03.2008 made to the 1st respondent, as arbitrary and illegal. When the matter is taken up for hearing, the learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that in view of the averments made in counter affidavit filed by the 2nd respondent, no further orders are necessary in this writ petition, and the same may be closed. In view of the above, no orders need be passed in the writ petition, and the same is accordingly closed. No costs. ______________ N.V.RAMANA, J 10th June, 2009 bcj