IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction) WEDNESDAY, THE FIFTEENTH DAY OF SEPTEMBER TWO THOUSAND AND FOUR PRESENT THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE B.PRAKASH RAO WRIT PETITION NO : 8635 of 2004 Between: 1 Vaddadi Narasing Rao, S/o Srirama Murthy, Member, Bala Ganapathi Sangam, Chodavaram, Vizag, Dist 2 Kaki Rajulamma, W/o Narasimha Murthy, Trustee, Swaymabu Vigneswara Temple, Citizen Colony, Chodavaram, Vizag Dist 3 Chekuri Suryanarayana Raju, S/o Tammi Raju, Hardware Merchant, Anakapalli-Chodavaram Road, Chodavaram, Vizag Dist 4 Vuppala Venkateswara Rao, S/o Lakshmana Murthy, Oil Merchant , Chodavaram, Vizag Dist 5 Bamidimarri Trinadha Rao, S/o Venkata Ramayya, Chodavaram, Vizag Dist .....PETITIONERS AND 1. The Government of Andhra Pradesh Department of Cinematograph, Secretariat Buildings, Hyderabad. 2. The District Collector, Visakhapatnam. 3. The Circle Inspector of Police, Chodavarm , Visakhapatnam District. 4. Chodavaram Gram Panchayat, Rep.by its Village Secretary, Chodavarm, Visakahaptnam District. 5. Sri Sai Lakshmi Cine Complex rep.by its Managing Partner- Sri.P.Sitarama Kumar, S/o Ramu, aged about 50 years, Resident of Chodavaram, Vizag District. .....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, order or direction more particularly one in the nature of the writ of Mandamus, directing the Respondent Nos. 1 to 4 to grant licence or permission to enable the 5th respondent to construct a twin theatre cinema complex in R.S.No. 66/1 of Chodavarm Village of Visakhaptnam District declaring their action as illegal and ultra vires to the provision of Articles 14 and 21 of Constitution of India and also the mandatory provisions of AP. Cinema (Regulation) Rules, 1970 and the rules framed there under from time to time and to direct the respondent Nos.2 to 5 not to proceed further. Counsel for the Petitioners: MR.V.S.R.ANJANEYALU Counsel for the Respondents 1 to 4: GP FOR HOME Counsel for the RespondentNo.5: Notice sent returned unserved. The Court made the following: ORAL ORDER: The learned counsel for the petitioners seeks permission of this Court to withdraw the writ petition. Permission is accorded. Accordingly, the writ petition is dismissed as withdrawn. No costs. ___________ 16-09-2004 To 1. The Secretary to the Government of Andhra Pradesh, Department of Cinematograph, Secretariat Buildings, Hyderabad. 2 The District Collector, Visakhapatnam. 3 The Circle Inspector of Police, Chodavarm , Visakhapatnam District. 4 The Village Secretary, Chodavaram Gram Panchayat, Chodavarm, Visakahaptnam District. 5 Two CCs to Government Pleader for Home, High Court Buildings, Hyderabad. (OUT) 6. Two CD copies. sj