IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction) WEDNESDAY, THE TWENTY SECOND DAY OF DECEMBER TWO THOUSAND AND FOUR PRESENT THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE B. SUDERSHAN REDDY and THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE M.NARAYANA REDDY WRIT PETITION NO : 23316 of 2004 Between: 1 Sampalli Vineel Chandra, S/o. S. Muralidhar Rao, Minor, Rep by mother, Natural guardian Smt. S. Vidya, W/o. S. Muralidhar Rao, aged 43 years, Occ : Housewife, R/o. Flat No. 201, Excel Avenue, Plot No. 140, Rajeevnagar Colony, Hyderabad. 2 Sampalli Vishal, S/o. S. Muralidhar Rao, Minor, Rep by mother Natural guardian Smt. S. Vidya, W/o. S. Muralidhar Rao, aged 43 years, Occ : Housewife, R/o. Flat No. 201, Excel Avenue, Plot No. 140, Rajeevnagar Colony, Hyderabad. ..... PETITIONERS AND 1. The Recovery Officer, Debts Recovery Tribunal, Triveni Complex, Abids, Hyderabad. 2 S. Muralidhar Rao, S/o. Hanumantha Rao, R/o. Flat No. 201, Excel Avenue, Plot No. 140, Rajeevnagar Colony, Hyderabad. 3 The Branch Manager, State Bank of India, Secunderabad Branch, Patny Circle, Secunderabad. .....RESPONDENTS Petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed herein the High Court may be pleased to issue any writ, order or direction, more particularly one in the nature of Writ of Certiorari or any other appropriate Writ, order or direction call for the records and declare the impugned order dt. 2-8-2004 passed in R.P.No. 31/2001 in O.A.No. 58/1995 on file of the 1st respondent herein as arbitrary, illegal for the reason not impleading petitioners or effected parties to the impugned order and quash the same in the interest of justice and equity. For the Petitioners: MR.I.LAXMIKANTHA RAO, Advocate. For Respondent No.1: MR.A.RAJASHEKAR REDDY (SC FOR CG) For Respondent No. 3: Smt. P. Laxmi Kumari, Standing Counsel. For Respondent No. 2: ------- The Court at the stage of admission made the following Order: (per Sri B. Sudershan Reddy, J) Sri Prasada Sharma, learned counsel appearing on behalf of Sri Laxmikantha Rao, learned counsel for the petitioners states that the main case itself is posted for pronouncement of judgment today and hence he seeks leave of this Court to withdraw the writ petition. The Writ Petition shall accordingly stand dismissed as withdrawn without any order as to costs. (B. Sudershan Reddy, J) 22-12-2004 (M. Narayana Reddy, J) ks To 1. The Recovery Officer, Debts Recovery Tribunal, Triveni Complex, Abids, Hyderabad. 2. The Branch Manager, State Bank of India, Secunderabad Branch, Patny Circle, Secunderabad. 3. Two CD copies.