IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction) MONDAY, THE EIGHTH DAY OF JUNE TWO THOUSAND AND NINE PRESENT THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE C.V.NAGARJUNA REDDY WRIT PETITION NO : 11088 of 2009 Between: M.Geetha W/o.Sivaramakrishna R/o.Gayatrinagar,Vijayawada,Krishna District ..... PETITIONER AND 1 G.Ratna Raju S/o.venkanna Gannavaram (Presently in Central Crime Station) Vijayawada, Krishna District 2 Sheikh Hussain S/o.Nazar Hussain Machavaram P.S., Vijayawada ,Krishna Dsitrict 3 M.V.Sambaisva RAo S/o.Kotaiah Machavaram P.S., Vijayawada ,Krishna Dsitrict 4 N.Adinarayana Raju S/o.Krishnam Raju Machavaram P.S,.Vijayawada,Krishna District 5 Government of AP., rep.by the Principal Secretary Law & Legislative Affairs, Secretariat,Hyderabad .....RESPONDENTS Counsel for the Petitioner: MR.K.BALAGOPAL Counsel for Respondent Nos.1 to 4: ------ Counsel for Respondent No.5: GP FOR LAW & LEGISLATIVE AFFAIRS The Court made the following : ORDER: In this Writ Petition, the innocuous relief claimed by the petitioner is to direct respondent No.5 to dispose of her representation dated 22-04-2009. Heard Sri K.Balagopal, learned Counsel for the petitioner, and the learned Assistant Government Pleader for Home for respondent No.5. The petitioner is the sister of one V.Durga Prasad @ Pilli Durga Prasad. The petitioner’s brother was killed in an alleged encounter involving respondent Nos.1 to 4 in the year 2002. On a private complaint filed by the petitioner, a criminal case was registered and the same is pending as S.C.No.248 of 2008 on the file of VIII Additional District and Sessions Judge (Fast Track Court), Vijayawada. Apprehending that the regular Public Prosecutor may not be impartial in conducting the prosecution, the petitioner made representation dated 22-04-2009 to respondent No.5 to appoint a special Public Prosecutor to conduct the trial. Her grievance is that though the said representation was received on 24-02-2009 by respondent No.5, no order has been passed so far. The petitioner averred that the trial is likely to commence at any time from now and unless the said representation is disposed of by respondent No.5, her interest will be seriously affected. Having regard to the facts of the case, I feel that interests of justice would be met if respondent No.5 is directed to dispose of the petitioner’s representation dated 22-04-2009 within a period of two weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. The decision taken by respondent No.5 on the representation of the petitioner shall be communicated to her immediately after its disposal. The Writ Petition is, accordingly, disposed of. As a sequel to disposal of the Writ Petition, WPMP.No.14242 of 2009 filed by the petitioner for interim relief is disposed of as infructuous. ___________________________ (C.V.NAGARJUNA REDDY, J) 8th June, 2008 Note: Furnish CC in three days. B/o LUR