IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction) WEDNESDAY, THE THIRD DAY OF NOVEMBER TWO THOUSAND AND FOUR PRESENT THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE V.V.S.RAO WRIT PETITION NO : 17327 of 2003 Between: Dr.K.Madhusudhan Rao s/o.K.Chokka Rao R/o.Plot No.146, Srinagar Colony(West) Hyderabad. ..... PETITIONER AND 1. NTR University of Health Sciences A.P., Vijayawada 520008, rep.by its Registrar. 2. Dr.K.Sirisha, W/o P.Srimannarayana, R/o 6-3-903/A/9, Street No.10, Rajbhavan Road, Somajiguda, Hyderabad. 3. Dr.E.Sridevi, W/o Suresh Babu, R/o Gadwal, Mahaboob Nagar Dist. (Respondents 2 and 3 are impleaded as per Court order Dt.8.12.2003 in W.P.M.P.No.25569/03 and 22545/03) .....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 an order direction or writ particularly one in the nature of Writ of Mandamus or any other appropriate writ declaring the action of the respondent in not reserving 85% of the seats in MDS Course in favour of local candidates as illegal and arbitrary and consequently direct the respondent to fill up the seats MDS seats in the Government Dental College and Hospital at Hyderabad for the academic year 2003 -04 by reserving 85% (12 seats) in favour of local candidates and offer only 15% (2 seats) in favour of candidates notified in Regulation 3 (F) of the Prospectus. Counsel for the Petitioner: MR.S.RAVINDRANATH Counsel for the Respondent No.1: SMT.Y.PADMAVATHI Counsel for Respondents 2 and 3: Venkateswarlu Posani The Court made the following : THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE V.V.S.RAO WRIT PETITION NO.17327 OF 2003 ORDER: This matter has been coming high-up in the list. On 29.10.2004, when the matter was called, learned counsel for the petitioner was absent and there was no representation. Therefore, the Court directed the matter to be listed on 03.11.2004, under the caption ‘For Dismissal’. Today when the matter is called, though the matter is listed under the caption ‘For Dismissal’, none appears. Learned counsel for the petitioner is absent and there is no representation, though the list was circulated was circulated to the learned counsel well in advance. The writ petition, therefore, is dismissed for default/ non-prosecution. ___________ (V.V.S.RAO,J) 03.11.2004. pln To 1. The Registrar, NTR University of Health Sciences, A.P., Vijayawada. 2. 2 CD copies.