IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction) MONDAY, THE SEVENTH DAY OF JANUARY TWO THOUSAND AND EIGHT PRESENT THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE GODA RAGHURAM WRIT PETITION NO : 12506 of 2004 Between: Sanngeeta Raj, @ Sangeeta Bhanj, W/o. Buddhader Bhanj, Residing at Babu Street, Baripada District, Mayurbhanj, Orissa State, Rep by her Power of Attorney Holder, Mr. Jatiya Mohanty, S/o. Late Chokra Mohanty, aged 59yrs. R/o of Honnali Village, Chowkipet P.O., Mandasa Mandal, Srikakulam District. ..... PETITIONER AND 1 The District Collector, Srikakulam District, Srikakulam District. 2 The Additional Revenue Divisional Officer, (Land Reforms), Srikakulam. 3 The Revenue Divisional Officer, Tekkali. 4 The Divisional Forest Officer, Srikakulam. .....RESPONDENTS 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 writ order or direction, more particularly a writ in the nature of mandamus under Act. 226 of the constitution of India declaring the action of the respondents in not paying any amount to the petitioner for the fruit bearing trees lying in the surrendered land in L.C.C. 306/SMT/75 as arbitrary, illegal, and violative of Art.14 of the Constitution of India and consequently direct the respondents to estimate the value of the fruit bearing trees and pay the amount to the petitioner and pass such other orders. Counsel for the Petitioner:MR.M.S.R.SUBRAHMANYAM Counsel for the Respondents: GP FOR REVENUE The Court made the following : THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE GODA RAGHURAM WRIT PETITION No : 12506 of 2004 ORDER: The writ petition is filed aggrieved that the respondents have failed to pay the compensation amount due and payable to the petitioner for the fruit bearing trees in the land surrendered in L.C.C. No. 306/SMT/75 of Srikakulam District. It is now represented by the learned counsel for the petitioners that the 1st respondent has re-determined the amount of compensation payable for the fruit bearing trees in the surrendered land of the petitioner as initially determined by the Revenue Divisional Officer, Tekkali. The petitioner however disputes the 1st respondent’s re-determination. As the substantive grievance in the writ petition no longer subsists and the amount as re-determined by the 1st respondent has been paid, no further orders are required in this writ petition. The petitioner, is however, at liberty to pursue appropriate remedies in respect of his grievance with regard to the re- determination of compensation amount by the 1st respondent. The writ petition is dismissed as above. There shall be no order as to costs. ____________________ GODA RAGHURAM,J DATE: 1st July, 2008 pnb To 1 The District Collector, Srikakulam District, Srikakulam District. 2 The Additional Revenue Divisional Officer, (Land Reforms), Srikakulam. 3 The Revenue Divisional Officer, Tekkali. 4 The Divisional Forest Officer, Srikakulam. 5 2 C.Cs. to the Govt. Pleader for Revenue, High Court Buildings, Hyderabad. 6 Two C.D. copies ..... REGISTRAR // TRUE COPY // SECTION OFFICER