IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction) THURSDAY, THE FOURTEENTH DAY OF AUGUST TWO THOUSAND AND EIGHT PRESENT THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE GODA RAGHURAM WRIT PETITION NO : 17719 of 2008 Between: M/s. Sri Venkata Ramana Stone Crusher, rep. by its Managing Partner, G. Prabhakar Rao, S/o. Ramaiah R/o. H.No.1-1-1/1/23, (New No.1-13-414), Mahalakshmi Nagar Colony, Nizamabad District. ..... PETITIONER AND 1 The A.P. State Financial Corporation, rep. by its Managing Director, Chirag Ali land Head Office, R/o. 5-9-194, Abids, Hyderabad. 2 The A.P. State Financial Corporation, rep. by its Assistant General Manager, (AM/BIFR Department) Head Office. R/o. 5-9-194, Abids, Hyderabad. 3 The A.P. State Financial Corporation, rep. by its Senior Branch Manager, D.NO.6-2-256/1, Ground Floor, Opp: 2-P Office, Subash Nagar, Nizamabad. .....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, order or direction more particularly one in the nature of Writ of Mandamus declaring the action of the respondents No. 1 to 3 in conducting auction of the petitionr residential house bearing Door No.1-1-1/123 (New No.1-13-414), Anandnagar Colony, Mahalaxminagar, Nizamabad District to an extent of 290.10 sq. yards which was offered as a collateral security to M/s. Venkata Ramana Stone Crushers unit situated at Nizamabad by way of public auction vide the publication dated 24.08.2007 published in Andhra Jyothi Daily Newspaper in respect of Item No.17 of the property by way of a section 9 of the SFC's Act is arbitrary, bad in law and illegal, violation of principles of natural justice and contrary to the SFC's Act 1951 and contrary to the Judgment of the Supreme Court reported in 2008 (4) SCALE Page No.473 and consequently set aside the proposed sale in the interest of justice and pass Counsel for the Petitioner:MR.KURITIBHASKARA RAO Counsel for the Respondent No.: MR.M.S.RAMACHANDRA RAO The Court made the following : ORAL ORDER: The learned counsel for the petitioner states that the petitioner seeks to withdraw the Writ Petition in order to file a fresh one, in view of the errors in the petition. Granting liberty as sought, the Writ Petition is dismissed as withdrawn. There shall be no order as to costs. GODA RAGHURAM, J DATE: 14.08.2008 CVM