IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction) THURSDAY, THE THIRTIETH DAY OF JUNE TWO THOUSAND AND FIVE PRESENT THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE R.SUBHASH REDDY WRIT PETITION NO : 2974 of 2001 Between: M/s. Jaya Diagnostic Research Centre represented by its Managing Director, B.K.Rao,Medwin Hospital RR Towners, Chiragali-lane. ..... PETITIONER AND 1 A.P.Transco Rep.by its Chairman & Managing Director Vidyuthsoudha, Hyderabad 2 Superintending Engineer(Operation) Circle North, Mint Compound. Hyderabad 3 Senior Accounts Officer, O/o Superintending Engineer(O) Circle North, Mint Compound. Hyderabad .....RESPONDENTS 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 issue a Writ order or direction, more particularly one in the nature of Writ of Mandamus, declaring the proceedings issued vide Lr.No.Dy.CCA(R)/AO(HT)/HDN- 404/2001, dt: 9/2/2001 of the respondents as illegal, arbitrary, non-speaking order and contrary to the understanding reached between parties and opposed to welfare measures for rendering appropriate essential services vide verse and further declare the action of the respondents as violative of Article 14 in not according permission ''on account payment'' against the C.C. Bills of the petitioner hospital for 1996-97 on par with C.D.R. and other Corporate Hospitals as discriminatory as well declare the levy of surcharge against the petitioner without clearing the credit bills payable by the respondents for the services rendered/availed on credit basis form the petitioner and meeting dissimilar treatment as un-sustainable and opposed to public policy and bad in law and order to extend the benefit as was done in the case of C.D.R. Hospital for adjustment of credit bills by waiving surcharges. Counsel for the Petitioner: MR.P.SRINIVASULU Counsel for the Respondents: MR.M.SRIRAMULU REDDY (SC FOR APTRANSCO) The Court made the following : ORDER: The learned Counsel for the petitioner submits that the writ petition has become infructuous. Recording the above submission, the writ petition is dismissed as infructuous. _________________ 30th June, 2005 Nn. Copy to: 1 The Chiarman & Managing Director, A.P.Transco, Vidyuthsoudha, Hyerabad 2 The Superintending Engineer(Operation) Circle North, Mint Compound, Hyderabad 3 The Senior Accounts Officer(O) Circle North, Mint Compound. Hyderabad 4. Two C.D. copies.