IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction) FRIDAY THE TENTH DAY OF JULY TWO THOUSAND AND NINE PRESENT THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE V.ESWARAIAH and THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE P.SWAROOP REDDY WRIT PETITION NO : 18883 of 2000 Between: Mangam Sampath Rao S/o. Vinkanna, Ayodhyalanka, H/o. Bheemalapuram, Achanta (M), W.G. District. ..... PETITIONER AND 1 The Lok Ayuktha of A.P. Hyderabad. 2 The District Collector, W.G. District. 3 The Mandal Revenue Officer, Achanta, W.G. District. 4 The Station House Officer, Achanta P.S. Achanta, W.G. District. 5 Ch. Satyanarayana S/o. Sattiraju R/o. Ayodhyalanka (v), Bheemalapuram, Achanta (M), W.G. District. .....RESPONDENT(S) 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 to call for the records in complaint No. 699/97/131, dt. 11-10-1999 on the file of the Lok Ayukta of Andhra Pradesh and quash the same and the consequential criminal complaint in FIR No. 12/2000 on the file of the S.H.O. Achanta P.S. and the consequential proceedings in Roc.No.74/2000(b), dt. 22-2-2000 issued by M.R.O.Achanta (M), W.G. District, as the same are illegal, arbitrary and issued without jurisdiction by issuing a Writ of certiorari or any other appropriate writ, order or direction, and pass such other order or orders as this Hon'ble Court may deems fit and proper in the circumstances of the case. Counsel for the Petitioner: MR.CH.T.SRIRAMA MURTHY Counsel for the Respondent No.: MR.M.V.S.SURESH KUMAR The Court made the following : ORDER: (Sri Justice V.Eswaraiah) When the matter has been taken up for hearing on 9.7.2009, neither the petitioner nor his counsel were present and there was no representation on their behalf. Therefore, the matter was directed to be posted on 10.7.2009 under the caption ‘For Dismissal’. Even today also, though the matter is listed under the caption ‘For Dismissal’ neither the petitioner nor his counsel are present and there is no representation on their behalf. In the circumstances, the writ petition is dismissed for default. No order as to costs. The interim order granted earlier shall stand vacated. ________________ V.ESWARAIAH, J. _________________ P.SWAROOP REDDY, J. 10.7.2009 kpr