IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction) FRIDAY, THE FOURTH DAY OF MARCH TWO THOUSAND AND FIVE PRESENT THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE V.ESWARAIAH WRIT PETITION NO : 21483 of 2004 Between: Adarsha Mahila Mandali Society, Regd.No.625/95, rep.by its president, Smt.P.Laxmi Sujatha, W/o.Vinod Babu, Ex-MPTC, R/o.D.No6-137, Kothapeta, Dhaweleswaram, East Godavari District. ..... PETITIONER AND 1 The Government of A.P. rep.by Commissioner, Prohibtion & Excise, Nampally, Hyderabad. 2 The Superintendent, Prohibition & Excise, Kakinada, East Godavari District. 3 Yedla Mahalaxmi, W/o.Srinivasa Rao, R/o.D.No.11-59, Car Street, Dhawaleswaram, East Godavari 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 order or orders, direction or directions, writ or writs, particularly one in the nature of "writ of Mandamus" and declare the action of the respondents 1 to 2 in proposing to issue bar licence under IL 17 in favour of 3rd respondent is against Rule 29 of A.P.Indian Liquor & Foreign Liquor Rule 1970, without considering the objections raised by the petitioner's society and other local people is illegal, arbitrary, against the provison of Excise Act and Rule 29 of A.P.Indian Liquor & Foreign Liquor Rule 1970, consequently direct the respondents not to issue any licence under IL 17 in favour of 3rd respondent to open a bar in H.NO.18-96, Dhawaleswaram village, East Godavari District, without considering the objections raised by the petitioner's society and local people. Counsel for the Petitioner: MR.VENKATESWARA RAO GUDAPATI Counsel for the Respondent Nos.1 and 2: GP FOR PROHIBITION & EXCISE Counsel for the Respondent No.3 : Mr.K. Sarvabhouma Rao The Court made the following : O R D E R: Sri V.Srinivas Rao, Advocate representing Sri Gudapati Venkateswara Rao, learned counsel appearing for the petitioner submits that the subject matter of the present Writ Petition has become infructuous. Recording the above submission, the Writ Petition is dismissed as infructuous. There shall be no order as to costs. ________________ V.ESWARAIAH, J Dated:04-03-2005 CCM To 1. The Commissioner, Prohibtion & Excise, Government of A.P. Nampally, Hyderabad. 2 The Superintendent, Prohibition & Excise, Kakinada, East Godavari District. 3. Two CCs to GP for Prohibition & Excise, High Court Buildings, Hyderabad (OUT) 4 2 CD Copies