IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction) THURSDAY, THE SIXTEENTH DAY OF OCTOBER TWO THOUSAND AND EIGHT PRESENT THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE V.V.S.RAO WRIT PETITION No.18730 of 2005 Between: Bharatiya Vidya Bhavan, Hyderabad Kendra, having its office at 5- 9-1105, king koti Road, Basheerbagh, Hyderabad-500 029, represented by Registrar T.N.Ramani ..... PETITIONER AND 1 A.P.Housing Board, represented by its Vice-Chairman and Housing Commissioner, Gruhakalpa, Nampally, Hyderabad. 2 Government of Andhra Pradesh, represented by its Secretary, Housing department, Secretariat, 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 a writ or writs more particularly one in the nature of mandamus or any other appropriate writ direction or order, calling for the records and declaring that the action of the 1st respondent in highhandedly dispossessing the petitioner from the land leased to it in Red Hills, under colour of proceedings No.3688/J5/70 dated 14-7-2005, without following the due process of law and subsequently trying to sell the same by public auction, is illegal and contrary to petitioner's rights under the 99years lease and directing the 1st respondent to restore the possession of the said land admeasuring 7700 sq.yards in T.S.No.36, with the School building and other structures thereon and the 300 sq.yards in T.S.No.25 to the petitioner and giving such other direction or directions as may be deemed just and proper. Counsel for the Petitioner: SRI T.VENUGOPAL REDDY Counsel for the Respondents: SRI J.PRABHAKAR The Court made the following : THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE V.V.S.RAO WRIT PETITION No.18730 of 2005 ORDER: When the matter was called on 15.10.2008, learned Counsel for the petitioner was absent. Therefore, the matter was directed to be listed today under the caption “for dismissal”. Today the matter is appearing very high up in the list under the said caption. In spite of the same, learned Counsel for the petitioner is absent and there is no representation on his behalf. The Writ Petition is, therefore, dismissed for default/non-prosecution. No costs. _____________ (V.V.S.RAO, J) 16.10.2008 vs To 1 The Vice-Chairman and Housing Commissioner, A.P.Housing Board, Gruhakalpa, Nampally, Hyderabad. 2 The Secretary, Government of Andhra Pradesh, Housing department, Secretariat, Hyderabad. 3 2CCs to 4 2CD copies Form-NIC-OGS/WP{RS}