IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction) MONDAY, THE EIGHTEENTH DAY OF FEBRUARY TWO THOUSAND AND EIGHT PRESENT THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE C.V.NAGARJUNA REDDY WRIT PETITION NO : 25009 of 2006 Between: Vijayalakshmi Waddera labour Contract Co-op. Society Ltd., Rep. by its President V. Yadagiri, ..... PETITIONER AND The Commissioner, Alwal Muncipality, Ranga Reddy District. .....RESPONDENT 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 an appropriate writ, order or direction more particularly one in the nature of writ of Mandamus declaring the action of the respondent not following various G.O.s according to which 15% of the works notified belonging to the respondent authority for reserving, societies belonging to be Wadderas , SC/STs and not callijng tenders for sanitation works for last more than 3 years and allowing to continued their interested contractors without following reservationrule is illegal, arbitrary, and violation of G.Os particularly G.O.Ms.No. 475 M.A. dt. 28-8-1989 and others and Article 14, 21 of the Constitution of India consequently direct the respondent to call for open tenders and reserve 15% of the sanitation works within the jurisdiction of respondent authority and pass such other order or orders may deem fit and proper. Counsel for the Petitioner: None The Court made the following: THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE C.V.NAGARJUNA REDDY WRIT PETITION No.25009 of 2006 ORDER:- This writ petition is filed for the following substantive relief: “… Hon’ble Court may be pleased to issue an appropriate writ, order or direction more particularly one in the nature of writ of mandamus declaring the action of the respondent not following the G.Os., according to which, 15% of the works notified belonging to the respondent authority for reserving societies are belonging to Wadderas, SC/STs and not calling tenders for sanction works for the last more than three years and allowing to continue their interested contractors without following reservation rule, as illegal, arbitrary and violation of G.Os., particularly G.O.Ms.No.475, M.A. dated 28.08.1989 and others and Articles 14, 21 of the Constitution of India. Consequently direct the respondent to call for open tenders and reserve 15% of the sanitation works within the jurisdiction of respondent authority and pass such other order or orders may deem fit and proper.” There is no representation for the petitioner both in the forenoon and again in the afternoon. The docket proceedings of the case show that on the previous two occasions also there was no representation on behalf of the petitioner. It is therefore reasonable to presume that the petitioner is not interested in prosecuting their cause in the writ petition. The writ petition is therefore dismissed for default. As a sequel to dismissal of the writ petition, WPMP.No.32022 of 2006 filed by the petitioner for interim relief is also dismissed. ____________________________ C.V.NAGARJUNA REDDY, J Date: 18.02.2008 ES To 1.2CCs 2.2CD copies