IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction) WEDNESDAY, THE TWENTY SIXTH DAY OF MARCH TWO THOUSAND AND EIGHT PRESENT THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE V.V.S.RAO and THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE C.V.RAMULU WRIT PETITION NO : 2740 of 2007 Between: C. Prakash S/o. Late C. Kondaiah, Hindu Dilsukhnagar, Hyderabad-60 ..... PETITIONER AND 1 The Chief Judge, City Civil Court, Hyderabad. 2 The Registrar (Administration) High Court of A.P. High Court Buildings, 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 writ, order or direction more particularly one in the nature of writ of Mandamus declaring the action of the 1st Respondent in passing Removal Order vide Proceedings Dis. No. 1/CCC-HYD/AW/Even/51/2002/1352 dt. 18-2-2003 that too with retrospective effect from 2-11-2001 which is confirmed by the 2nd Respondent vide proceedings Roc No. 374/2005 C.4(con) dt. 8-11-2005 as illegal, arbitrary and violative of Article 14, and 16 of the Constitution of India and consequently direct the respondents to reinstate the petitioner into service with all consequential benefits of back wages, seniority, Promotion, etc., forthwith and pass such other order or orders as this Hon'ble Court may deem fit and proper in the circumstances of the case. Counsel for the Petitioner:Sri M.RAMU Counsel for the Respondents: (SC FOR APHC)D.V.SITHARAM MURTHY The Court made the following : THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE V.V.S.RAO AND THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE C.V.RAMULU WRIT PETITION No.2740 of 2007 ORDER: (per Hon’ble Sri Justice V.V.S.Rao) The matter is coming up before the Bench since February 2007 and was adjourned eleven times. On the last occasion when the learned Counsel for the petitioner was absent, the matter was passed over. Again when it was called, there was no representation, and the learned Counsel for the petitioner was absent. Therefore, this Bench directed the matter to be listed under the caption “for dismissal”. Today, the matter is appearing under the caption “for dismissal”. In spite of the same, and in spite of the fact that the matter is appearing as item No.1 in today’s board, nobody appears, and the learned Counsel for the petitioner is absent. Therefore, the Writ Petition is dismissed for default/non- prosecution. No costs. ____________ (V.V.S.RAO, J) ______________ (C.V.RAMULU, J) 26.03.2008 vs To 1 The Chief Judge, City Civil Court, Hyderabad. 2 The Registrar (Administration) High Court of A.P. High Court Buildings, Hyderabad. 3 2CD copies. Form-NIC-OGS/WP{VSMI}