IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction) WEDNESDAY, THE NINETEENTH DAY OF NOVEMBER TWO THOUSAND AND EIGHT PRESENT THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE N.V. RAMANA WRIT PETITION NO : 23469 of 2008 Between: 1 Sharada Seva Samithi, (A Registered Society), R/o. Flat No. 304, RK Arcade, Sriram Nagar Colony, Masab Tank, Hyderabad. Rep. by its President Y.S. Chalapathi Rao, S/o. Y.A. Rama Rao, ageda about 57 years, Occ : President of Sharada Seva Samithi, R/o. Flat No. 304, RK Arcade, Sriram Nagar Colony, Masab Tank, Hyderabad. 2 Y.S. Chalapathi Rao, S/o. Y.A. Rama Rao, R/o. Flat No. 304, RK Arcade, Sriram Nagar Colony, Masab Tank, Hyderabad. ..... PETITIONER(S) AND 1 The State of Andhra Pradesh, Rep. by its Prl. Secretary to Government, Revenue Department, Secretariat Building, Secretariat, Hyderabad - 500 022. 2 The District Collector, Ranga Reddy District. 3 The Revenue Divisional Officer, Chevalla Division, Attapur, Hyderabad. 4 The Mandal Revenue Officer, Chevalla, Ranga Reddy, District, O/o. MRO, Chevella, R.R. Dist. .....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 to issue an order or direction more in the nature of writ of mandamus, declaring the action of the respondents in not taking any action for issuing Pattadar Pass Books by duly demarcating the boundaries of the land Ac. 2.00 in S.No. 290, Pamana(V), Chevella (M), RR Dt. even though the petitioner society made representation dated 26.07.2007, 23.08.2008 & 18-9-2008, as illegal, arbitrary and violative of rights guaranteed under Article 14, 19, 21 of Constitution of India and by holding that the respondent 3 & 4 failed to perform their statutory duties as per AP Rights in Land and Pattadar Pass Books Act 1971 and its Rules 1989 and consequeintly direct the respondents herein to carry out necessary mutation entries in the revenue record by issuing Pattadar Pass Books in the name of 1st Petitioner Socieity and pass Counsel for the Petitioner:LAWYERS GRID Counsel for the Respondent No.: GP FOR REVENUE The Court made the following : ORDER: Since the learned counsel for the petitioners was not present nor was there any representation on his behalf on 12-11-2008, the writ petition was posted ‘for dismissal’ today. Today also, when the case is called, learned counsel for the petitioners is not present nor is there any representation on his behalf. Hence, the writ petition is dismissed for non-prosecution. No order as to costs. __________________ 19th November, 2008 MSV/SKM