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 : 19961 of 1999 Between: M/s Rallis India Ltd., Gummadidala (V), Jinnaram Mandal, Medak District Rep.by its Regional Manager (Pesticides) Mr.Surender Reddy, S/o.Venkat Reddy, aged 45 yrs, R/o.Gandhi Nagar, Hyderabad ..... PETITIONER AND 1 The Government of Andhra Pradesh Agricultural and Coop. Department rep.by its Prl. Secretary, A.P.Secretariat, Hyderabad. 2 The Commissioner & Director of Agriculture Andhra Pradesh, Gunfoundry, Hyderabad .....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 issue any appropriate writ, order or direction one more particularly in the nature of certiorari calling for the records pertaining to the Orders passed by the 1st respondent in Appeal in Govt. File No.7200/FP.II(1)/99, Dt.08/09/1999 and quash the same as being illegal, arbitrary, unconstitutional being violative of Art.14 and 19(1)(g) of the Constitution of India and further declare the same as being contrary to the provisions of the Insecticides Act, 1968 and the Insecticides Rules 1971 or in the alternative this Hon'ble Court may be pleased to direct that the orders of the 1st respondent in Appeal in Govt. File No.7200/FP.II(1)/99, Dt.08/09/1999 shall be confined only to the "Monochrotophos 36% SL" of Batch No.S-124 of Manufacturing date of 8/98 and pass such further or other order or orders. Counsel for the Petitioner:MR.P.SUDHEER REDDY Counsel for the Respondent No.: GP FOR COOPERATION 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