IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction) FRIDAY, THE FOURTH DAY OF JULY TWO THOUSAND AND EIGHT PRESENT THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE C.V.NAGARJUNA REDDY WRIT PETITION NO : 14116 of 2005 Between: 1 N.Narasimha Reddy, s/o Obula Reddy, Bandi Atmakur Gram Panchayat, Bandi Atmakur (Village and Mandal), Kurnool District. 2 G.Vijaya Lakshmi, w/o Paparayudu, Kakanur Gram Panchayat, Bandi Atmakur Mandal, Kurnool District. 3 N.Pedda Venkata Subba Reddy, s/o Vengal Reddy, Parnapalle Gram Panchayat, Bandi Atmakur Mandal, Kurnool District. 4 S.Nagalakakshamma, w/o Bala Pullaiah, Bodhanam Gram Panchayat, Bandi Atmakur Mandal, Kurnool District. 5 M.Sudguna Raju, s/o Yesaiah, A.Koduru Gram Panchayat, Bandi Atmakur Mandal, Kurnool District. 6 Shaik Shahajadi, w/o Mahaboob Saheb, Singavaram Gram Panchayat, Bandi Atmakur Mandal, Kurnool District. ..... PETITIONERS AND 1 The Government of A.P., rep., by its Secretary, Panchayat Raj Department, Secretariat, Hyderabad. 2 The District Collector, Kurnool, Kurnool District. 3 The Mandal Development Officer, M.P.D.O.Office, Bandi Atmakur Village and Mandal, Kurnool District. 4 The Assistant Executive Engineer (P.R.) M.P.D.O.Office, Bandi Atmakur Village and Mandal, Kurnool District. .....RESPONDENTS Counsel for the Petitioners: SRI.P.VENGALA REDDY Counsel for the Respondents: GP FOR PANCHAYAT RAJ & RURAL DEV. The Court made the following : O R D E R: This writ petition is filed for the following substantive relief: “In these circumstances I pray 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 respondents in not implementing the Food for Work programme as per the guidelines issued in G.O.Ms.No.37, P.R.& R.D. (Progs.IA) Department, dated 18-2-2005 as illegal and arbitrary and consequently direct the respondents to follow the guidelines issued in G.O.Ms.No.37, P.R.& R.D.(Progs.IA) Department, dated 18-2-2005.” At the hearing, Sri P.Vengala Reddy, learned counsel for the petitioners, submitted that the cause in the writ petition does not survive for consideration. Hence, the writ petition is dismissed as infructuous. As a sequel to dismissal of main petition as infructuous, WPMP No.17928 of 2005 filed by the petitioners for interim relief is also dismissed as infructuous. C.V.NAGARJUNA REDDY,J Dated 4th July, 2008 vrn