IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction) MONDAY, THE FIRST DAY OF SEPTEMBER TWO THOUSAND AND EIGHT PRESENT THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE B.SESHASAYANA REDDY WRIT PETITION No.11876 of 2008 Between: M/s. Prathyusha Chemicals and Fertilisers Limited, a company incorporated under the provisions of the Companies Act having its regd. office situated at E-Bonangi village, IDA Parawada, Parawada Mandal Visakhapatnam District rep. by its Assistant manager S.P.Chandrasekhar RAo S/o.S.P.Sastry, aged 44 years, R/o.Hyderabad ..... PETITIONER AND 1 The Union of India, rep. by its Deputy Secretary, Department of Chemicals and Fertilisers, Shastri Bhavan, New Delhi 2 Government of Andhra Pradesh, rep. by its Secretary Department of Agriculture, Secretariat, Hyderabad 3 The Commissioner & Director of Agriculture, Government of Andhra Pradesh, Hyderabad 4 The Director of Agriculture and Food Corporation, Bhubaneshwar, Orissa State. .....RESPONDENTS Petition under Article 226 of the constitution of India praying that in the circumstances stated in the aﬃdavit ﬁled herein the High Court may be pleased to issue any appropriate writ order or direction preferably a writ in the nature of writ of mandamus declaring the Notiﬁcation vide No.220011/04/2007/MPR dated 30.4.2008 issued by the 1st respondent in so far as stipulating the condition state in Sl.Nos. 8 to 10 that all the SSP (Single Super Phosphage) Fertilisers be marketed through large producers manufacturing more than one lakh metric tons per annum or through NPK/Urea Manufactures and the condition as stated in Sl.No.10 as arbitrary, illegal, discriminatory irrational unauthorized and violative of articles 14 and 19(1) (g) of the Constitution of India and set aside the same. Counsel for the Petitioner: MR.T.RAJENDRA PRASAD Counsel for the Respondents: MR.A.RAJASHEKAR REDDY (ASST SOLICITOR GEN) The Court made the following : THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE B.SESHASAYANA REDDY WRIT PETITION No.11876 of 2008 ORDER: Learned counsel appearing for the petitioner seeks permission to withdraw the writ petition. Permission, as sought for, is accorded. Accordingly, the writ petition is dismissed as withdrawn. There shall be no order as to costs. ________________________ (B.Seshasayana Reddy, J) Dated: 01.09.2008 sh