IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction) MONDAY, THE SEVENTH DAY OF JULY TWO THOUSAND AND EIGHT PRESENT THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE C.V.NAGARJUNA REDDY WRIT PETITION NO : 4087 of 2005 Between: Sri Syed Asadullah, S/o Late S.A. Hameed, R/o Mancheriyal Town, Mandal Mancherial , District - Adilabad. ..... PETITIONER AND 1The District Collector, Adilabad. 2The Revenue Divisional Officer, Mancheriyal at Mancheriyal District Adilabad. 3Shaik Ahmed Ali, S/o Mahboob Ali, 4S. Sadanandam, 5Prameela Devi, S/o Lingaiah, 6Sage Pocham, S/o Lingaiah, 7Gajeeli Shanker, s/o Dodudu, 8K. Lingaiah, 9Sage Venkati, (The Respondents 3 to 9 all the residence in C.C. Nagar, Chunam Bhatti, Mancheriyal Town and Mandal Mancheriyal District Adilabad. .....RESPONDENTS Counsel for the Petitioner:MR. M.N.RAO FOR MR.M.T.GHORI Counsel for Respondent Nos.1 & 2: GP FOR REVENUE Counsel for Respondent Nos.3 to 9: MR. V.RAVIKIRAN RAO The Court made the following : ORDER: This writ petition is filed for the following substantive relief: “In the above circumstances and interest of justice, it is prayed that this Hon’ble Court may be pleased to issue a Writ of Mandamus or order or any appropriate Writ declare the action of the first respondent issuing the impugned order dated 28.01.2005 in appeal No.D4/1582 of 2004 in respect of the land in Survey No.476/1 admeasuring 6.15 acres of Village Garimella, Mandal Manchiryal District Adilabad is illegal, arbitrary, void, unconstitutional under Articles 14 to 21 of the Constitution of India and principles of natural justice.” On 16.06.2008, the case was adjourned to 30.06.2008 on the representation of the learned counsel for the petitioner that the sole petitioner died in January, 2008 and steps are being taken to bring his legal representatives on record. On 30.06.2008, it was represented by the learned counsel for the petitioner that an application for bringing the legal representatives was already filed, and he sought for an adjournment for getting the same numbered and posted. Today, when the case was taken up for hearing, Sri M.N.Rao, learned counsel appearing for Sri M.T.Ghori, learned counsel for the petitioner represented that the application is not yet numbered. Since steps are not taken for bringing the legal representatives of the deceased sole petitioner despite repeated opportunities being given, I am not inclined to adjourn this writ petition further. The writ petition is, therefore, dismissed as abated. However, this order does not preclude the legal representatives of the deceased petitioner to pursue the appeal pending before respondent No.1 by coming on record as the legal representatives of the deceased petitioner. As a sequel to dismissal of main petition as abated, WPMP.No.5482 of 2005 is disposed of as infructuous. C.V.NAGARJUNA REDDY, J 7th JULY, 2008. Note: copy in one (1) week. B/o kvni