THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE C.V.NAGARJUNA REDDY WRIT PETITION NO.25978 OF 2006 Dated 27th July, 2010 Between: M.Bala Subbaiah …Petitioner And The Revenue Divisional Officer and another …Respondents Counsel for the petitioner : Sri G.Jagadeeswar Counsel for the respondents: None appeared The Court made the following ORDER: At the interlocutory stage, the writ petition is taken up for hearing and disposal having regard to the nature of the case. This writ petition is filed for a Mandamus to set aside order dated 02.09.2004 issued by respondent No.1. At the hearing, there is no representation for the respondents. I have heard Sri G.Jagadeeswar, learned counsel for the petitioner, and perused the record. The fair price dealership of the petitioner was suspended by the order impugned in this writ petition. This Court by interim order dated 27.12.2006 suspended the said proceeding. In the counter-affidavit filed by the Tahsildar, Seetharamapuram Mandal, Nellore District it is, inter alia, stated that the petitioner’s authorisation was restored in pursuance of the abovementioned interim order; that a fresh inspection was conducted by the Deputy Tahsildar, Civil Supplies, Buchireddipalem on 18.04.2008, which revealed certain irregularities on the part of the petitioner, and that after issuing show cause notice dated 18.04.2008 and considering the explanation offered by the petitioner, respondent No.1 has cancelled the petitioner’s authorisation by his order dated 18.10.2008. It is further stated that questioning the said order of cancellation, the petitioner filed W.P.No.25977 of 2008 in this Court and by order dated 27.11.2008 in WPMP No.33997 of 2008, this Court suspended the said order of cancellation and that on the strength of the said order, the petitioner is continuing as dealer. The above facts, which are not controverted by the learned counsel for the petitioner, reveal that the cause on which the present writ petition has been founded ceased to exist with the cancellation of the petitioner’s authorisation, which is subject matter of a separate writ petition as mentioned above. In view of these subsequent events, this writ petition has become infructuous and the same is accordingly dismissed as such without prejudice to the petitioner’s right to prosecute the pending writ petition filed against cancellation of his authorisation. As a sequel to dismissal of main petition as infructuous, WVMP No.2764 of 2010 filed by the petitioner is disposed of as infructuous. C.V.NAGARJUNA REDDY, J Dated 27th July, 2010 vrn