IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction) FRIDAY, THE FIFTH DAY OF JUNE TWO THOUSAND AND NINE PRESENT THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE C.V.NAGARJUNA REDDY WRIT PETITION No.1789 of 2009 Between: L. Venkatswami, W/o. Sri L. Krishnaiah, R/o. H.No. 16-11-741/D/41, Asmangadh, Malakpet, Hyderabad. ..... PETITIONER AND 1 The State of Andhra Pradesh, Rep. byits Principal Secretary, Department of Home, Secretariat, Hyderabad. 2 The Commissioner of Police, Hyderabad City, Hyderabad. 3 The Station House Officer, Malakpet, Police Station, Hyderabad. 4 K. Ashok, S/o. Kannaiah, R/o. 16-11-781/6 & 781/39/C, Besides Balaji Sweet Hosue, Moosarambagh, Malakpet, Hyderabad. 5 K. Jagdish, S/o. Bagaiah, R/o. 16-11-781/6 & 781/39/C, Besides Balaji Sweet Hosue, Moosarambagh, Malakpet, Hyderabad. 6 C. Krishnaiah, S/o. Yadaiah, R/o. 16-11-781/6 & 781/39/C, Besides Balaji Sweet Hosue, Moosarambagh, Malakpet, Hyderabad. 7 K. Vijaya Sai, S/o. Vittal, R/o. 16-11-781/6 & 781/39/C, Besides Balaji Sweet Hosue, Moosarambagh, Malakpet, Hyderabad. .....RESPONDENTS Counsel for the Petitioner:SRI.SUNIL GAWASANE The Court made the following: ORDER: This writ petition is filed for the following substantive relief: “For the reasons stated in the accompanying affidavit, it is prayed that this Hon’ble Court may be pleased to issue an appropriate Writ or order or direction more particularly one in the nature of Writ of Mandamus declaring the action of the respondents in interfering with the business of hair Cutting Saloon situated in the premises bearing Municipal Shop No.2, Ground Floor admeasuring 200 Sft. In Vijetha R.S. Corner forming part of Municipal No. 16-11-20/14/A in Sy.No. 7 situated at Saleemnagar Colony, Malakpet, Hyderabad as illegal, arbitrary and unconstitutional and against the principles of natural justice and consequently direct the respondents not to interfere in the hair cutting business and to take action on the complaints dt. 21-09-2009 and 31-01-2009 made to the respondent No.3 herein.” At the hearing, Sri Sunil Gowsane, learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the cause in the writ petition has become infructuous. The writ petition is therefore, dismissed as such. As a sequel to dismissal of main petition as infructuous, WPMP.No.2262 of 2009 filed by the petitioner for interim relief is disposed of as infructuous. C.V.NAGARJUNA REDDY, J 5th JUNE, 2009. kvni