IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction) TUESDAY, THE SIXTEENTH DAY OF JUNE TWO THOUSAND AND NINE PRESENT THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE R.SUBHASH REDDY WRIT PETITION NO : 21039 of 2002 Between: The Jawahar Co-operative Urban Bank Ltd., Rep by its Chief Executive Officer,Mr.Venu Manohar 1st Floor, Opp.Saroornagar P.S., Dilsukhnagar, Hyderabad. S/o.Late Ramakrishna Rao, Chikadpalli,Hyderabad. .... PETITIONER AND 1 The government of India Ministry of Finance, Department of Economic Affairs(BD), Jeevan Deep Building, 3rd Floor, Parliament Street, New Delhi-110001. 2 Reserve Bank Of India Rep by its Executive Director Central Office Worli, Mumbai-18 3 The General Manager, Reserve Bank of India, Central Office, Urban Banks Department, 1st Floor, Garment House, Worli, Mumbai-18. 4 The Registrar of Co-operative Societies, Gruhakalpa buildings, Hyderabad, A.P., 5 The Dy.Co-operative Officer Rangareddy District. 6 R.N.Anand S/o,. Late S.N.Anand R/o. k.5/3, AWGHS Salunke Vihar, Pune., .....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 issue notice call for the records on the file of the 1st Respondent in appeal No.A.14/19/2002-AC and quash the order dt.18.10.2002 by holding the same as unlawful, arbitrary, perverse and contrary to the mandatory provisions of the Banking Regulation Act.1949, resulting in Micarriage of Justice by issuing a Writ of Certiorari or any other appropriate Writ and consequently set aside the order dt.8.5.2002 of the respondent No.2 and the consequential proceedings of the respondent No.3 dt.14.5.2002 and pass Counsel for the Petitioner:MR.MINNIKANTI LAXMIPRASAD Counsel for the Respondent No.: MR.A.RAJASHEKAR REDDY (ASST SOLICITOR GEN) The Court made the following : HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE R.SUBHASH REDDY WRIT PETITION NO.21039 of 2002 ORDER: This Writ Petition was listed for hearing on 15.06.2009. As there was no representation when the matter was called, it is posted under the caption “for dismissal”. Although the matter is listed under the caption “for dismissal”, to day also there is no representation on behalf of the petitioner. Hence, the Writ Petition is dismissed for non-prosecution. No costs. _____________________ (R.SUBHASH REDDY,J) Date.16-06-2009 IVD/ASP HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE R.SUBHASH REDDY WRIT PETITION NO.21039 of 2002 Date.16-06-2009 IVD/ASP