IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction) THURSDAY, THE TWENTY SIXTH DAY OF JUNE TWO THOUSAND AND EIGHT PRESENT THE HON'BLE MRS JUSTICE T.MEENA KUMARI and THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE RAMESH RANGANATHAN WRIT PETITION NO : 24610 of 1996 Between: M/s Jaya Diagnostic & Research Centre Limited, Rep by its Managing Director, B.K.Rao, Registered under the Companies Act having its Registered Office at 100, Raghavratna Towers, Chirag Ali Lane, Abids, Hyderabad. ..... PETITIONER AND 1 The Commissioner, Municipal Corporation Hyderabad. 2 The Deputy Commissioner, Circle No.6, Municipal Corporation of Hyderabad, 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 of Mandamus or any other writ, order or direction, declaring the action of the respondents in not complying the action of the respondents in not complying with the statustory procedure outlined in Section 223 of the Hyderabad Municpal Corporations Act, 1955 while disposing of the complaints filed against the reteable vale by the petitioner on 29.03.1995 response to the Special Notices issued by the second respondent under Section 220(2) of the H.M.C.Act,1995, and passing order vide proceedings in Leters Nos.1124/S3/TC/6/96/DATED 20-9-1996 AND LETTER NO:1103/S3/TC6/986 DATED 23-10-1996 after one year and six months on a date of which no intimation was given to the petitioner and enhancement of reteable value vis-a-vis property tax with retrospective effect from 1-10-94 as illegal improper, arbitrary, violation of statutory rules and principles of natural justice and be further pleased to pass such other order or orders as may be just and equitable. Counsel for the Petitioner:MR.D.VIJAYA SHANKAR Counsel for the Respondent No.: GP FOR MUNCIPAL ADMN. & URBAN DEV. The Court made the following : HON’BLE MRS JUSTICE T.MEENA KUMARI AND HON’BLE MR JUSTICE RAMESH RANGANATHAN W.P.No.24610 of 1996 (per Hon’ble Smt. Justice T.Meena Kumari) Though the matter is of the year 1996 and listed for final hearing, learned counsel for the petitioner is not present when the case is called nor is there any representation on his behalf. The writ petition is dismissed for non-prosecution. No costs. _____________________ T.MEENA KUMARI,J Date: 26-6-2008 ___________________________ RAMESH RANGANATHAN,J