IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction) MONDAY, THE SEVENTEENTH DAY OF MARCH TWO THOUSAND AND EIGHT PRESENT THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE N.V. RAMANA WRIT PETITION NO : 24678 of 2007 Between: Vankireddy Subadramma, W/o. Late Raghava Reddy, R/o. Challavandlapalli, H/o. MOtamallela Post, Rompicherla Mandal, Chittoor District. ..... PETITIONER AND 1 The Tahsildar, Rompicherla Mandal, Chittoor District. 2 The Sub Collector, Madanapalli, Chittoor District. 3 Rachapalli Papireddy, S/o. R. Ramchandra Reddy, R/o. Bandameda Chellavandlapally Village, Rompicherla Mandal, 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 to issue an appropriate Writ or order or direction more particualrly onein the nature of Writ of Manamus declaring the action of the respondents in interfering with the peaceful possession and enjoyment of the Petitioner's Property situated at Motamallela Village, Chinna Gottigallu Sub District, Chittoor District in respect of Sy. No.711/7, 711/8. 710/3, admeasuring Ac.2-85 cents , AC.1-15 cents Ac.0-40 cents, within the boundaries of East ;Road and venka , West;R.Raghava Reddy lands, North; J Jayaram lands, South;Road, Vanka and Gutta without due Processof law as illegal, arbitrary, violative of principles of natural justice and also violative of Articles 14, 19, 21 and 300-A of the constitution of India and consequently direct the respondents not to interfere with the petitioner's property and pass such other or order or orders as this Hon'ble court may deem fit and proper in the circumstancesof the case. Counsel for the Petitioner:MR.K.BUCHI BABU Counsel for the Respondent No.: GP FOR REVENUE The Court made the following : THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE N.V. RAMANA Writ Petition No. 24678 of 2007 Order: As there was no representation on behalf of the petitioner on 10.03.2008, the matter was directed to be listed today under the caption “for dismissal”. Even today also, when the matter is called, none appeared for the petitioner nor is there any representation made on her behalf. Hence, the writ petition is dismissed for non-prosecution. No costs. ___________________ N.V. RAMANA, J. Date: 17.03.2008 Ksr/Nsr ..... REGISTRAR // TRUE COPY // SECTION OFFICER To 1.2CCs to 2.2CD copies Form-NIC-OGS/WP{SPJS}