IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction) MONDAY, THE SECOND DAY OF MARCH TWO THOUSAND AND NINE PRESENT THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE C.V.NAGARJUNA REDDY WRIT PETITION NO : 22926 of 2002 Between: 1 Mekala Balamallaiah S/o Sayanna Girinigadda, Jangon,Warangal Dist . 2 Mekala Sathemma W/o Balamallaiah Girinigadda, Jangon, Warangal Dist . 3 Mekala Ramanjaneylu S/o Balamallaiah Old Boinpally, Secunderabad. 4 Mekala Ramgopal S/o Balamallaiah Girinigadda, Jangaon, Warangal Dist. 5 Mekala Ramakrishna S/o Balamallaiah Old Boinpally, Secunderabad. 6 Mekala Lalitha W/o Ramanjaneyulu Old Boinpally, Secunderabad. 7 Mekala Shantha W/o Ramgopal Old Boinpally, Secunderabad. 8 Mekala Anuradha W/o Ramakrishna Old Boinpally, Secunderabad. ..... PETITIONERS AND Nagarapanchayat/Municipality, rep by its Commissioner, Jangaon, Warangal Dist. .....RESPONDENT Counsel for the Petitioners:None appeared Counsel for the Respondent: --- 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 pass an order or direction or writ under Article 226 of the Constitution of India more particularly one in the nature of writ of mandamus declaring the action of the respondent in rejecting the applications of the petitioners vide memo dt 28-10-02 for alternation of the ownership in the property as per “Alteration of Ownership of Property in Assessment Books Rules 1966” & the AP Municipalities Act 1965 and the rules framed thereunder basing on the letters dt 14-6-01 & 18-12-01 respectively said to have been issued by the Dist Collector, Warangal & the RDO Jangon as bad illegal, arbitrary violative of art 14 of the Constitution of India & contrary to the provisions of the AP Municipality Act 1965 & the Rules framed thereunder & consequently direct the respondents to consider the applications of the petitioners dt 23-10-02 for alternation of the ownership as per the applications as per the alteration Ownership of Property in Assessment Books rules 1966 & the AP Municipality Act 1965 and the rules framed thereunder” Both on 27-02-2009 and also today, there has been no representation for the petitioners. It is, therefore, reasonable to presume that the petitioners are not interested in pursuing their cause in this writ petition. The writ petition is, therefore, dismissed in default. C.V.NAGARJUNA REDDY, J Dated 2nd March, 2009 vrn