IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction) TUESDAY, THE FIFTEENTH DAY OF JULY TWO THOUSAND AND EIGHT PRESENT THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE C.V.NAGARJUNA REDDY WRIT PETITION NO : 14032 of 2005 Between: M/s.Satya Mineral Water Koyyalagudem, rep.by its Managing partner Bonagiri Papa Rao, W/o.Govinda Rao, Koyyalagudem village & Mandal, West Godavari District. ..... PETITIONER AND 1 The District Collector, at Eluru, West Godavari District. 2 The Joint Collector, at Eluru, West Godavari District. 3 The Revenue Divisional officer, at Eluru, West Godavari District. 4 The Mandal Revenue officer, Koyyalagudem, West Godavari District. 5 The Secretary, Koyyalagudem Gram Panchayat, Koyyalagudem, West Godavari District. 6 The Food Inspector (Prevention of Food Adulteration), Preventive Medicine, Kothadibba, Eluru, West Godavari Dist. .....RESPONDENTS Counsel for the Petitioner:MR. R.VENKAT RAO FOR MR.T.PRADYUMNA KUMAR REDDY Counsel for Respondent Nos.1 to 4: AGP FOR REVENUE Counsel for respondent No.6: GP FOR MEDICAL HEALTH AND FAMILY WELFARE The Court made the following : ORDER: This writ petition is filed for the following substantive relief: “For the reasons stated above, it is therefore prayed that this Hon’ble Court may be pleased to issue a writ, order or direction more particularly one in the nature of writ of Mandamus declaring the action of the respondent authorities in ordering the petitioner to close the water manufacturing unit and selling of Ayyappa's Satya Mineral water Sachets without any notice or under any statutory authority or right, as arbitrary, illegal, null and void and is against the principles of natural justice and norms of the public policy and violative of fundamental rights guaranteed under Article 14 & 19 of the Constitution of India and to further direct the respondent authorities to permit the petitioner to run the unit to enable him to obtain I.S.I.mark certificate.” At the hearing, Sri R.Venkat Rao, learned counsel representing Sri T.Pradyumna Kumar Reddy, learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the cause in the writ petition has become infructuous. In view of the submission of the learned counsel, the writ petition is dismissed as infructuous. As a sequel to dismissal of main petition as infructuous, interim order, dated 30.06.2005 is vacated, WPMP.No.17812 of 2005 is dismissed and WVMP.No.2628 of 2005 is disposed of as infructuous. C.V.NAGARJUNA REDDY, J 15th JULY, 2008. kvni