IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction) THURSDAY, THE TWENTY SIXTH DAY OF JUNE TWO THOUSAND AND EIGHT PRESENT THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE V.ESWARAIAH WRIT PETITION No: 13504 of 2005 BETWEEN: Smt. K. Suhasini W/o K. Tuljaram, R/o 409/5, 5th Block CBR Estates Deepthisree Nagar, Hafeezpet, Miyapur, Ranga Reddy District. ... PETITIONER AND 1 The Secretary, Home Department Government of A.P., Secretariat, Hyderabad. 2 The Commissioner of Police, Cyberabad, Hyderabad 3 The Station House Officer, Kukatpally P.S. Ranga Reddy District 4 The Branch Manager, State Bank of India Prashanthnagar Branch, Uppal, Ranga Reddy District 5 The Zonal Manager, State Bank of India Zonal Office, Region-II, 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 a Writ of Mandamus declaring the action of the respondents in resorting to the illegalities of threatening the petitioner to evict her forcibly by taking the help of respondent No.3 is illegal, arbitrary and without jurisdiction or authority and violative of Art 21 of the Constitution of India and consequently direct the respondents 2 and 3 not to resort to the illegalities of visiting to the premises of the petitioner for the purpose of evicting the petitioner forcibly and without following the due process of law at the instance of respondent Nos.4 and 5; and pass such other order or orders as this Hon'ble court may deem fit and proper in the circumstances of the case. Counsel for the Petitioner: MR.RAMESH MALLAM Counsel for the Respondents 1 to 3: GP FOR HOME Counsel for the Respondents 4 and 5: SMT. CHINTALAPUDI LAKSHMI KUMARI The Court made the following: ORDER: When the matter was taken up for hearing on 19.06.2008, as none appeared for the petitioner, the matter was directed to be listed under the caption ‘For Dismissal’. Today also, when the matter is taken up for hearing, neither the petitioner appears nor there is any representation on her behalf. The writ petition is dismissed for non-prosecution. There shall be no order as to costs. ______________ V. ESWARAIAH, J June 26, 2008 DSK