IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction) MONDAY, THE TENTH DAY OF MARCH TWO THOUSAND AND EIGHT PRESENT THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE C.V.NAGARJUNA REDDY WRIT PETITION NO : 4919 of 2008 Between: 1 Eduouganti Lakshman Rao S/o.Punachansrarao R/o.D.no.9-22 near Samidha Vidya Peeth Poranki village, Penamaluru Mandal Krishna district 2 Aluri Shyam Prasad S/o.Satyanarayana R/o.CTF 6 Venkata Enclave Ramachandra nagar, Vijayawada Krishna District 3 Uppalapati Narasimha Rao S/o.Gangadhara Rao Poranki village Penamaluru Mandal Krishna district 4 M.Govinda Rao S/o.Suryanarayana 70-2-39 Flat No.303 Preetam Nivas, Patamata, Vijayawada-10 5 P.Ravinder Babu S/o.Venkateswarlu Flat No.202, HRT Residency, Siddhartha Nagar Vijayawada-10 6 Z.Satyanarayana S/o.Bapaiah Flat No.303, Sriram Priya Residency Moghulrajupuram Vijayawada-10 7 J.Dhananjayarao S/o.Krishnaiah 76-12-10/2 Bhavani Puram, Vijayawada-1 ..... PETITIONERS AND 1 The Commissioner of Police, Vijayawada Urban Opp:State Guesthouse, Vijayawada, Krishna district 2 The Circle Inspector, Patamata circle, Vijayawada Krishna District 3 The District Collector, Machilipatnam krishna District 4 The Sub Inspector of Police, Patamata P.S.Vijayawada, Krishna District .....RESPONDENTS Counsel for the Petitioners:MR. V.BALAJI FOR MR.CH.RAGHU RAM Counsel for respondent No.3: None appeared Counsel for Respondent Nos.1, 2 & 4: AGP FOR HOME The Court made the following : ORDER: This writ petition is filed for the following substantive relief: “It is therefore prayed that this Hon’ble Court may be pleased to issue a Writ, order or direction more particularly one in the nature of Writ of Mandamus declaring the inaction on the part of the respondents and in not taking any action on the complaints given by the Petitioners herein by as illegal, arbitrary, unreasonable and unconstitutional and consequently direct the Respondents to take immediate action on the complaints of the Petitioners.” At the hearing, Sri V.Balaji, learned counsel representing the petitioners submitted that since the respondents have already initiated action, the petitioners seek to withdraw the writ petition as not pressed. In view of the above, the writ petition is dismissed as withdrawn. As a sequel to dismissal of main petition as withdrawn, WPMP.No.6383 of 2008 filed by the petitioners for interim relief is disposed of as infructuous. C.V. NAGARJUNA REDDY, J 10th MARCH, 2008 kvni