IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction) MONDAY, THE TWENTIETH DAY OF OCTOBER TWO THOUSAND AND EIGHT PRESENT THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE N.V. RAMANA WRIT PETITION NO : 4030 of 2008 Between: Mannuru Venugopal Reddy S/o. Venkata Subba Reddy R/o. D.No. 615/42, Peddakapu Leyout, Tirupati, Chittoor District. ..... PETITIONER AND 1 The Revenue Divisional Officer, Tirupati, Chittoor District. 2 The Tahsildar, Yerpedu Mandal, Chittoor District. 3 Smt. Indira Raju W/o. V.N. Rajua S/o. Raja Rao Ramalinga Rayaningaru R/o. Nehru Street, Srikalahasti, Chittoor District. .....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 issue a writ in the nature of a writ of Mandamus or any other appropriate writ, Direction order or orders declaring the action of the 1st respondent in entertaining the appeal ﬁled by the 3rd respondent in Roc No. 2166 of 2007 as without jurisdiction and void. Counsel for the Petitioner: MR.M.P.CHANDRAMOULI Counsel for the Respondent No.: GP FOR REVENUE The Court made the following : Form-NIC-OGS/WP{VSMI} O R D E R:- Aggrieved by the action of the 1st respondent-Revenue Divisional Oﬃcer in entertaining the appeal ﬁled by the 3 rd respondent against the order passed by the 2nd respondent- Tahsildar, the petitioner has filed this writ petition. When the matter is taken up, it is represented by the learned counsel for the petitioner that the appeal itself has been disposed of by the 1st respondent, and the order passed by the 1st respondent in the appeal is the subject matter in W.P.No.9932 of 2008. In view of the above, nothing survives for consideration in this writ petition and the same is accordingly dismissed as having become infructuous. No costs. ______________ N.V.RAMANA, J 20th October, 2008 ksr/bcj