THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE C.Y.SOMAYAJULU WRIT PETITION No. 22864 of 1996 And WRIT PETITION No.22876 of 1996 DATED: 08..11..2005 W.P.No.22864 of 1996: BETWEEN: Kalagara Suranna and four others …Petitioners And Union of India, rep.by its Secretary, Sastri Bhavan, New Delhi, Law Department and Four others …Respondents W.P.No.22876 of 1996: BETWEEN: Kalidindi Seetharama Raju …Petitioner And Union of India, rep.by its Secretary, Law Department, Sastri Bhavan, New Delhi and Four others …Respondents THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE C.Y.SOMAYAJULU WRIT PETITION No. 22864 of 1996 And WRIT PETITION No.22876 of 1996 COMMON ORDER: By these petitions, petitioners are questioning the inclusion of certain villages in the schedule areas. When a similar matter came up before a division bench in “BANDARU CHINASURAYYA v. UNION OF INDIA, REP.BY ITS SECRETARY, LAW DEPARTMENT AND FIVE OTHERS”, it is held that since the amendment to Regulation 1 of 1970 was issued by the Governor in exercise of powers conferred upon him under Article 244 read with Fifth Schedule of the Constitution of India, it is only the appropriate authority that can amend the legislation and this court in exercise of its jurisdiction under Article 226 of the Constitution of India cannot issue a Writ in the nature of Mandamus directing amendment thereto and dismissed their petition. In view thereof, these petitions are also liable to be and hence dismissed. No costs. ____________________ C.Y.SOMAYAJULU, J. Dated: 08-11-2005. rns THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE C.Y.SOMAYAJULU WRIT PETITION NO. 25061 of 1996 ORDER: By these petitions, petitioners are questioning the inclusion of certain villages in the scheduled areas when a similar matter came up before a Division Bench in writ petition No.2440 of 2001 in When the matter is taken up for hearing, there is no representation on behalf of the petitioner. Counsel for the respondent ready. Hence, the writ petition is dismissed for default with costs. ______________________ C.Y. SOMAYAJULU, J. Dated: 16..09..2005. rns