IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction) MONDAY, THE TWENTY SECOND DAY OF JUNE TWO THOUSAND AND NINE PRESENT THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE B.SESHASAYANA REDDY WRIT PETITION NO : 13611 of 2005 Between: Mohammed Shujath(Earliers known as Khwaja Moinuddin Shujath), S/o. Shaik Safdar Ahmed,R /o. Saptagiri New.No.117, Promenade Road, Bangalore. ..... PETITIONER AND 1 The Chief Executive and Secretary Counsel for the India School Certificate Examination, Pragathi House 3rd Floor, 47-48, Nehru Place, New Delhi. 2 Counsel for the India School Certificate Examination Rep.by Education Officer Pragathi House 3rd Floor, 47-48, Nehru Place New Delhi. 3 The Principal St. Joseph's Public School King Koti Road 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 may be pleased to issue an order, direction especially one in the nature of writ of Mandamus declaring that the communication given to me by the respondent No.2 vide his letter No.N/7-327/2002/1142 dated 23-04- 2002 rejecting my request for incorporating my changed name in their register and issue of Certificate (with changed name) which was communicated through 3rd respondent letter dated 23-4-2002 as illegal, arbitrary and is violative of Article 14,21 of the Constitution of India and further declare that the respondent 1 and 2 are bound to incorporate my changed name in their records and issue certificates and pass such other or orders as this Hon'ble Court may deem fit and proper in the circumstances of the case. Counsel for the Petitioner: MR.M.SURENDER RAO Counsel for the Respondents.: MR.A.RAJASHEKAR REDDY (ASST SOLICITOR GEN) The Court made the following : O R D E R : When this writ petition came up for hearing on 11.06.2009, there was no representation on behalf of the petitioner and therefore, it was directed to be listed under the caption ‘for dismissal’. Despite the matter being listed under the caption ‘for dismissal’ on this day, there is no representation on behalf of the petitioner. It indicates that the petitioner is not interested in pursuing this writ petition. Accordingly, the writ petition is dismissed for non-prosecution. No costs. ______________________ B.SESHASAYANA REDDY, J. Date:22nd June, 2009. cs ..... ASSISTANT REGISTRAR // TRUE COPY // SECTION OFFICER To 1. 2. 2CD copies Form-NIC-OGS/WP{VSMI}