IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction) TUESDAY, THE SEVENTEENTH DAY OF MARCH TWO THOUSAND AND NINE PRESENT THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE C.V.NAGARJUNA REDDY WRIT PETITION No.23180 of 2002 Between: Devara Udaya Bhaskara Vinod Rao, S/o Sri Vellanki, R/o Jangareddygudem Village & Mandal, West Godavari District. ..... PETITIONER AND 1 The Dist Collector, West Godavari District, Eluru. 2 The Revenue Divisional Officer, Kovvur Division, Kovvur, W.G.District. 3 The Revenue Divisional Officer, Jangareddygudem Division, Jangareddygudem, West Godavari District. .....RESPONDENT(S) Counsel for the Petitioner:MR.G.KRISHNA MURTHY Counsel for the Respondents:AGP FOR REVENUE The Court made the following : ORDER: This writ petition is filed for the following substantive relief: “For the reasons stated in the accompanying affidavit filed in support of the above writ petition, the petitioner herein prays that this Hon’ble Court may be pleased to issue a writ, order or direction more particularly one in the nature of a Writ of Mandamus declaring the action of the respondent authorities in not passing the award and pay the compensation for acquisition of the petitioner's lands of an extent of Ac.8-43 cents covered by survey No.24/1, 24/2, 25 & 26/4 of T.Gangannagudem Village, Jeeligumilli Mandal by fixing compensation at Rs.2 Lakhs per acre and other benefits provided under Act 68 of 1984 is illegal, arbitrary and contrary to the provisions of the Land Acquisition Act (68/84), and violative of Art. 300A of the Constitution of India and direct the respondents to pay the compensation at Rs.2 Lakhs per acre to the Petitioner's lands of an extent of Ac.8-43 cents and other benefits forthwith.” At the hearing, Sri G.Krishnamurthy, learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that though the sole petitioner died and he has instructed his legal representatives for taking steps to file appropriate application to come on record, the latter have not evinced any interest. He, therefore, reported that he is unable to take steps to bring the legal representatives of the petitioner on record. In view of the same, the writ petition is dismissed as abated. C.V.NAGARJUNA REDDY, J 17th MARCH, 2009. kvni