IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction) MONDAY, THE TWENTY FIFTH DAY OF AUGUST TWO THOUSAND AND EIGHT PRESENT THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE C.V.NAGARJUNA REDDY WRIT PETITION NO : 11508 of 2004 Between: 1 Dr. Chigurupati Jayaram S/o. Krishna Murthy R/o. Plot No.770/E, Road No.44, Jubilee Hills, Hyderabad - 500 033. 2 Smt. Chigurupati Padmasree W/o. Dr.Chigurupati Jayaram R/o. Plot No.770/E, Road No.44, Jubilee Hills, Hyderabad - 500 033. ..... PETITIONERS AND 1 The Govt. of A.P rep. by its Principal Secretary (Home) Secretariat, Hyderabad. 2 Inspector General of Police A.P. Grey Hounds, Hyderabad. 3 The Special Deputy Collector Land Acquisition (Industries), Domalguda, Hyderabad. ....RESPONDENTS Counsel for the Petitioners:MR P.SRINIVASA RAO FOR MR.P.SRI RAGHU RAM Counsel for the Respondents: AGP FOR LAND ACQUISITION The Court made the following : O R D E R: This writ petition is ﬁled for the following substantive relief: “It is therefore prayed that this Hon’ble Court may be pleased to issue a writ, order or direction more especially one in the nature of writ of Mandamus declaring the action of the 3rd respondent in not releasing the compensation for the acquisition of land of an extent of 33 guntas in Sy.Nos 352/1, 353/1 and 354/1 at Manchirevula village, Rajendranagar Mandal R.R. District for the purpose of Command Training Centre of A.P. Grey Hounds, Hyderabad and encroachment of an extent of Ac.3.25 guntas by the 2nd respondent in Survey Nos.352/1, 353/1 and 354/1, at Manchirevula village, Rajendranagar Mandal, R.R.District as arbitrary, illegal and violative of Articles 14,16, and 21 of the Constitution of India and consequently, direct the 3rd respondent to release the compensation for acquisition of land of an extent of 33 guntas in Sy.Nos 352/1,353/1 and 354/1 at Manchirevula village, Rajendranagar Mandal, R.R.District for the purpose of Command Training Centre of A.P Grey Hounds, Hyderabad.” At the hearing, Sri P.Srinivasa Rao, learned counsel for the petitioners, invited my attention to proceedings dated 02- 04-2004, wherein the Government asked for certain clariﬁcations from the District Collector, Ranga Reddy District, in the context of withdrawal of proposals under Section 48(1) of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894. With reference to this memo, the learned counsel submitted that as the proposals for withdrawal of acquisition proceedings appear to be pending, the petitioners may be permitted to withdraw the writ petition with liberty to ﬁle a fresh petition as and when a fresh cause of action arises and pursue other remedies as are open to them in law. In view of this submission of the learned counsel for the petitioners, the writ petition is dismissed as withdrawn with liberty in terms of the prayer made. C.V.NAGARJUNA REDDY, J Dated 25th August, 2008 vrn