IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction) THURSDAY, THE TWENTY FIFTH DAY OF JUNE TWO THOUSAND AND NINE PRESENT THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE GHULAM MOHAMMED and THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE VILAS V. AFZULPURKAR WRIT PETITION NO : 4951 of 2004 Between: In Cable Net (Andhra) Limited, Rep. by Managing Director, Sri.R.V.R.Chowdary, S/o. R.P.Chowdary, R/o.Om Plaza, Street No.7, Domalaguda, Hyderabad. ..... PETITIONER AND 1 The Election Commission of India, rep. by its Secretary, Nirvachan Sadan, Ashok Road, New Delhi. 2 The Secretary, Ministry of Information and Broadcasting, Government of India, New Delhi. 3 The Chief Electoral Officer, Andhra Pradesh, Secretariat, Hyderabad. 4 The Joint Chief Electoral Officer, General Administration (Elections) Department, Government of A.P., Hyderabad. 5 The District Election Officer/The Commissioner, Municipal Corporation of Hyderabad, Hyderabad. 6 The State of Andhra Pradesh, rep. by its Secretary, Department of Home, Government of A.P., Hyderabad. .....RESPONDENT(S) 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 To issue a writ order or direction more particularly one in the nature of writ of Mandamus, declaring therule 7(3) of the Cable Television Net Work Rules 1994 in so far relating to political advertisement during the elections and the consequential declaration that the banning of political adveritsement through electronic media under Rule 7(3) of the Cable Television Net Work Rules 1994 by the respondents as illegal, arbitrary, unconstitutional, unreasonable, without any power or authority or jurisdiction and violative of Article 14, 19(1) (a) and (g) and 19(2), 21 of the Constitution of India and consequently direct the respondnets to permit the political advertisement through electronic media such as Cable T.V.Net work etc. Counsel for the Petitioner:MR.T.RAJENDRA PRASAD Counsel for the Respondent No.: MR.A.RAJASHEKAR REDDY (ASST SOLICITOR GEN) The Court made the following : ORAL ORDER: (per THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE GHULAM MOHAMMED) It is represented by the learned counsel for the petitioners that the writ petition has become infructuous. The writ petition is accordingly dismissed as infructuous. No costs. ________________________ GHULAM MOHAMMED,J ____________________________ VILAS V. AFZULPURKAR ,J ASP