IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction) TUESDAY, THE TWENTY NINETH DAY OF APRIL TWO THOUSAND AND EIGHT PRESENT THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE V.ESWARAIAH WRIT PETITION NO : 13298 of 2004 Between: Alexander Chaturvedi S/o Sachchidanad rep by his fatehr and Natural Guardian Sachchidanand, Professor in University of Hyderabad R/o B-30, University campus, Hyderabad ..... PETITIONER AND 1 The Controller of Examinations, Central Board] of Secondary Educations, New Delhi 2 The Deputy Secretary Central Board of Secondary Education, Regional Office, New No.3, Old Plot No. 1630-A J. block, Annanagar (West) Chennai .....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 a Writ, order or driection more particulary one in the nature ofWrit of Mandamus or any other appropriate Writ, decalring the actionof the office of the respondents in not correcting my sons date of birth of the petitioner in his marks Memo as well as in the pass certificate as illegal, arbitrary and it is further consequently direct the respondents to forthwithcorrect the date of birth of my son is hismarks memo as well as in the pass certificate bearing SL. No. 006899, S.No. 200-2 and Roll No. 4102814 dt 28-5-2002 of the marks memo S.No. SSE/277657/2002 (6110) dated 27-5- 2002of the pass certificate of my son by substituting 30-5-1987 as his date of birth in the place of 15-9-1987 inthe date of birth column of his marks Memo as welll as his pass certificate of XII standard respectively and Counsel for the Petitioner:MR.I.M.SABRY Counsel for the Respondent No.: SMT.A.CHAYA DEVI The Court made the following : THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE V.ESWARAIAH WRIT PETITION No.13298 of 2004 ORDER: When the matter has been taken up for hearing on 22-04-2008, none appeared for the petitioner and as such, the matter has been posted “for dismissal”. Today also, when the matter is taken up for hearing, neither learned counsel for the petitioner is present nor is there any representation on his behalf. Accordingly, the writ petition is dismissed for non-prosecution. There shall be no order as to costs. ___________ 29-04-2008 Prv ..... REGISTRAR // TRUE COPY // SECTION OFFICER To 1.2CCs to 2.2CD copies Form-NIC-OGS/WP{TRT}