IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction) FRIDAY, THE SEVENTH DAY OF AUGUST TWO THOUSAND AND NINE PRESENT THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE B.SESHASAYANA REDDY WRIT PETITION NO : 21752 of 2003 Between: Srivalli Dega D/o Muralikrishna H.NO.239, Mahendra Hills, Eastmarredpally, Secunderabad-26. ..... PETITIONER AND 1 The State of A.P., Rep. by its Secretary, Medical & Health Department, Secretariat, Hyderabad. 2 The Director of Medical Education, Government of A.P., Sultan Bazar, Hyderabad. 3 Kakatiya Medical College, Rep. By its Principal, Warangal. .....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 writ, order or direction more particularly in the nature of Writ of Mandamus, declaring the actin of the Government in so far as collecting different sets of tution fee for the students admitted into the same course for the same academic year as illegal, discriminatory and violative of Article 14 of the Constitution of India and accordingly direct the respondents to treat the students admitted into the same course for the same academic year on par (ii) and accordingly direct the respondents to refund the excess amount of 5000 US $ (collected during the Academic Year 200-2001) to the petitioner or adjust towards the tution fee payable for the current academic year 5th semister (iii) direct the respondents to fix the tution fee in respect of resident Indian students in rupee value pending at the time of joining the course without reference to exchange ratio prevailing at varying times and pass such other other or orders as this Hon'ble Court may deem fit and proper in the circumstances of the case. Counsel for the Petitioner:MR.Y.VENKATESH REDDY Counsel for the Respondent No.: GP FOR MEDICAL HEALTH & FAMI.WELFARE The Court made the following : O R D E R : Despite the matter being listed under the caption ‘for dismissal’ on this day, there is no representation on behalf of the petitioner. It indicates that the petitioner is not interested in pursuing this writ petition. Accordingly, the writ petition is dismissed for non-prosecution. No costs. ______________________ B.SESHASAYANA REDDY, J. Date:07th August, 2009. cs ..... ASSISTANT REGISTRAR // TRUE COPY // SECTION OFFICER To 1. 2. 2CD copies Form-NIC-OGS/WP{VSMI}