IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction) TUESDAY, THE TWENTY THIRD DAY OF JUNE TWO THOUSAND AND NINE PRESENT THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE C.V.NAGARJUNA REDDY WRIT PETITION NO : 11591 of 2009 Between: O. Yella Reddy S/o. Late Sri O. Rama Subba Reddy R/o. Plot No. 673, Defence Colony, Sainikpuri, Secunderabad. ..... PETITIONER AND 1 The Station House Officer P.S. Kharkana Hyderabad. 2 The Commissioner of Police Basheerbagh, Hyderabad. 3 The Additional Director General of Police (CID) Andhra Pradesh at Hyderabad. 4 The Director General of Police Having Office at Lakdikapool, Hyderabad. 5 The Government of andhra Pradesh Reptd. by its Secretary Home Department, Secretariat Buildings, Hyderabad. 6 M/s. Narne Estates Pvt. Ltd. Rep. by its Director, Col. Ranga Rao No.1, Gunrock Enclave, Secunderabad. .....RESPONDENTS Counsel for the Petitioner: MR.M.A.MUJEEB Counsel for Respondent Nos.1 to 5: GP FOR HOME Counsel for Respondent No.6: The Court made the following: ORDER: This Writ Petition is filed for the following substantive relief: “to issue an appropriate writ or order or direction more particularly, in the nature of writ of mandamus declaring the action of respondents 1 to 5 in not executing N.B.W. against respondent No.6 in pursuance of the orders passed in EA 7 of 2008 filed for execution of the judgement and order passed by the Hon'ble A.P. State Consumer Disputes Redressal Forum in FA No. 454 of 2008 in CC 844 of 2006 as illegal, arbitrary and violative of the Fundamental rights and consequently, direct respondents 1 to 5 to execute NBW against respondent No.6 and produce him before the Consumer Disputes Redressal Forum I, Hyderabad.” On 15-06-2009, there was no representation for the petitioner. Even today, when the Writ Petition is called, there is no representation for the petitioner. Hence, the Writ Petition is liable to be dismissed for non-prosecution. Even otherwise, the Writ Petition is liable to be dismissed because in the counter-affidavit filed by respondent No.1, it is stated that respondent No.6 filed appeal in FA.No.455 of 2009, along with Interlocutory Application No.933 of 2009, against the impugned order of issuance of non-bailable warrants against him and got interim stay of execution of warrants till 24-07- 2009 and that therefore, he could not be arrested. In view of the same, the Writ Petition is dismissed. As a sequel to dismissal of the Writ Petition, W.P.M.P.No.14929 of 2009 filed by the petitioner for interim relief is disposed of as infructuous. ___________________________ (C.V.NAGARJUNA REDDY, J) 23rd Jne, 2009 LUR