IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction) FRIDAY, THE FIRST DAY OF AUGUST TWO THOUSAND AND EIGHT PRESENT THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE V.ESWARAIAH WRIT PETITION No: 25240 of 2001 BETWEEN: 1 B.K. Doraiswamy Hindu S/o. Late B.V.K. Iyyengar, R/o. Hyderabad. 2 B.K. Mukund, Hindu S/o. Late B.V.K. Iyyengar, R/o. Hyderabad, presently R/o. Mumbai. ... PETITIONERS AND 1 The Municipal Commissioner, Municipal Corporation of Hyderabad, Tankbund, Hyderabad. 2 The Deputy Municipal Commissioner, Municipal Corporation of Hyderabad, Tankbund, Hyderabad. 3 G.P.Krishna, Hindu S/o. Late S.D.S. Iyyengar, R/o. H.No.3-6- 721/404, Street No.11, Himayathnagar, Hyderabad. Rep. by their G.P.A., P.Venkat Ram Reddy , S/o. P.L.N.Reddy, Age.52, R/o. 1-1-8-702/21/2, Nallakunta, Hyderabad. 4 G.P.Ranga Raju, S/o. Late S.D.S. Iyyengar, R/o. Plot No.48, H.M.T. Bearings Officers Colony, Sainikpuri, Secunderabad. Rep. by their G.P.A., P.Venkat Ram Reddy , S/o. P.L.N.Reddy, Age.52, R/o. 1-1-8-702/21/2, Nallakunta, Hyderabad. ...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 declaring the action of the respondents 1 and 2 in not demolishing the constructions made by the respondents 3 and 4 illegal arbitrary and in violative of this Hon'ble Court's order passed in W.P.M.P.No.1651 of 1995 in W.P.No.1350 of 1995 dated 6.2.1995 and consequently direct the respondents 1 and 2 to demolish the consequently direct the respondents 1 & 2 to demolish the constructions made by the respondents 3 & 4 in the name and style of "Huligadri Apartments" and pass such other order or orders. Counsel for the Petitioners: Counsel for the Respondents: SMT.KALPANA EKBOTE SC FOR MPL CORP GP FOR MPL ADMN & URBAN DEV The Court made the following: ORDER: When the matter has been taken up for hearing on 25.07.2008, the learned counsel for the petitioners, Sri P. Govind Reddy, made a representation that the petitioners have taken away the ﬁle and he has already given no objection, therefore, he has no instructions. Accordingly, the matter was directed to be posted under the caption ‘For Dismissal’ while printing the name of the petitioners. 2. As per the direction of this Court the matter has been posted today under the caption ‘For Dismissal’ while printing the names of the petitioners. When the matter has been taken up for hearing today, none of the petitioners appeared before this Court representing their case. The writ petition is accordingly dismissed for default of the petitioners. There shall be no order as to costs. ______________ V. ESWARAIAH, J August 1, 2008 DSK