APHC010348852010 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) [3459] WEDNESDAY,THE THIRD DAY OF DECEMBER TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SMT JUSTICE SUMATHI JAGADAM WRIT PETITION NO: 20388/2010 Between: 1. M/S. MAHARAJA PULVARISING MILLS, MANGAMPET,, OBULAVARIPALLI MANDAL, KADAPA DISTRICT, REPRESENTED BY ITS SOLE PROPRIETRIX SHAIK ZAHARA BEE R/O.8/126, ALMASPET, KADAPA. ...PETITIONER AND 1. THE EMPLOYEES STATE INSURANCE CORPORATION, REPRESENTED BY ITS REGIONAL DIRECTOR, BASHEERBAGH, HYDERABAD. 2. THE RECOVERY OFFICER THE EMPLOYEES STATE INSURANCE, CORPORATION, BASHEERBAGH, HYDERABAD. ...RESPONDENT(S): Petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed therewith, the High Court may be pleased toissue a writ, order or direction more particularly one in the nature of writ of Mandamus declaring the action of the respondents in issuing warrant of attachment of immovable property in his 52, Q/9718-67, dt. 25.11.2009 by the 2nd respondent demanding Rs.5,61,718/- as on 30.11.2009 with further interest from the petitioner, though the petitioner is not in due, even without any notice, any enquiry and any determination as illegal, unjust, arbitrary, highhanded against the principle of Promissory Estoppel and beyond limitation and against the statutory provisions including Sec.45 B of the Employees State Insurance Act, 1948 and consequently set aside the warrtant of 2 JS,J W.P.No.20388/2010 attachment of immovable property issued by the 2nd respondent in in his 52, Q/9718-67, dt. 25.11.2009 and consequently not to take any coercive action against the petitioner and pass. IA NO: 1 OF 2010(WPMP 25919 OF 2010 Petition under Section 151 CPC praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed in support of the petition, the High Court may be pleased direct the respondents not to take any coercive action against the petitioner or her properties in pursuance of the warrant of attachment of immovable property issued by the 2nd respondent in his 52, Q/9718-67, dt. 25.11.2009, pending disposal of the above Writ Petition and pass. Counsel for the Petitioner: 1. L J VEERA REDDY Counsel for the Respondent(S): 1. U.R.P. SRINIVAS 3 JS,J W.P.No.20388/2010 The Court made the following ORDER: Though the matter was adjourned on 26.11.2025, there was no representation on behalf of the learned counsel for the petitioner. Hence, the matter was listed today under the caption <for dismissal=. Today when the matter is called, there is no representation for the petitioner. It appears that the learned counsel for the petitioner is not interested to prosecute the case. Therefore, the Writ Petition is dismissed as non-prosecution. There shall be no order as to costs. As a sequel, miscellaneous applications pending, if any, shall stand closed. __________________________________ JUSTICE SUMATHI JAGADAM Dated: 03.12.2025 RSD 4 JS,J W.P.No.20388/2010 57 THE HONOURABLE SMT JUSTICE SUMATHI JAGADAM WRIT PETITION NO: 20388/2010 Dated: 03.12.2025 RSD