M. Srilakshmi v. The Government Of Andhra Pradesh,

THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE M.SEETHARAMA MURTI Writ Petition No.30121 of 2011 ORDER:

When the writ petition came up for hearing on 07.12.2015, this Court passed the following order:

"The learned counsel for the 3rd respondent/A.P. Olympic Association and the learned counsel for the 8th respondent/A.P. State Weightlifting Federation are present. The learned counsel for the 8th respondent would submit that after formation of the two States of Andhra Pradesh and Telangana and in view of the provisions of the State Reorganization Act and the orders of this Court made in a writ proceeding, separate Sports Authority and Olympic Association have been formed for the State of Telangana and that the said parties are necessary parties to this writ petition. When a similar representation was made by the learned counsel on 23.11.2015, the learned counsel for the writ petitioners sought time for doing the needful in the matter. However, there is no representation for the petitioners today.

It is also the submission of the learned Standing Counsel for the 8th respondent that when the writ petition was instituted in the year 2011, all the writ petitioners are minors and that by now they had attained the ages of majority and that in the facts and circumstances, the cause in the writ petition does not survive for adjudication.

Delete from the caption 'For Orders and list on 15.12.2015 under the caption 'For Dismissal'." When the writ petition was listed on 15.12.2015, the learned Senior Counsel for the petitioners sought time. Hence, the matter was directed to be listed on 07.01.2016 under the same caption. On 07.01.2016 and 20.01.2016, Sri M. Vasanth Kumar Anjan, the learned counsel undertook to file vakalat for the writ petitioners in the place of the learned senior counsel-Sri Satyam Reddy and sought time.

When the matter came up for hearing today, no vakalat is filed. There is no representation for the writ petitioners. It indicates that the

petitioners are not interested in pursuing the writ petition. The learned Standing Counsel representing the official respondents are present. The learned counsel for the 8th respondent while reiterating the submissions made on 07.12.2015, which are extracted supra, would further submit that the writ petitioners are participating in various competitions and events and that, therefore, the cause in the writ petition does not survive for adjudication. Recording the said submissions and having regard to the fact that there is no representation for the writ petitioners the Writ Petition is dismissed for default. There shall be no order as to costs. Miscellaneous petitions, pending if any, in the writ petition shall stand closed.

__________________ M. SEETHARAMA MURTI, J 03.02.2016 Vjl