IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction) FRIDAY, THE SEVENTEENTH DAY OF JUNE TWO THOUSAND AND ELEVEN PRESENT THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE C.V.NAGARJUNA REDDY Writ Petition No.29087 of 2008 Between: 1.Golla Thippaa and 3 others. ..... Petitioners AND 1.The District Collector, Kurnool, Kurnool Dist., and 2 others. .....Respondents Counsel for the Petitioners: Mr.J.Janki Rami Reddy Counsel for Respondent Nos.1 & 2: GP for Land Acquisition Counsel for respondent No.3: Smt.Ch.Vedavani The Court made the following: Order: This Writ Petition is filed for the following substantive relief: “to issue a writ, order or direction, more particularly one in the nature of writ of Mandamus to declare the action of the respondents in digging the land of the petitioners for laying the B.T.road without initiating the Land Acquisition proceedings and without following the due process of law as illegal and arbitrary and consequently direct the respondents to follow the procedure contemplated under the Law by initiating the Land Acquisition proceedings.” At the hearing, Sri J.Janki Rami Reddy, learned Counsel for the petitioners, sought for permission of the Court to withdraw the Writ Petition. To that effect, he addressed letter, dated 16-06-2011, to the Registry. The request of the learned Counsel for the petitioners is accepted. The Writ Petition is, accordingly, dismissed as withdrawn. As a sequel to dismissal of the Writ Petition, interim order, dated 06-01-2010, is vacated and WPMP.No.38012 of 2008, filed by the petitioners for interim relief, is disposed of as infructuous. ______________________ (C.V.Nagarjuna Reddy, J) 17th June, 2011 lur This Writ Petition is filed for the following substantive relief: “to issue a writ, order or direction, more particularly one in the nature of writ of Mandamus declaring the action of the 3rd respondent in issuing the proceedings No.PC/(Lands-I)/533/07, dated 16-10-2009, as illegal, arbitrary and violative of aRtiles 14, 21 and 19 (1) (g) of the Constitution of India and for a consequential order directing the respondents to extend the lease for a period of 20 years by considering the representation, dated 22-10-2009, and also by taking the cases of other lessees, who are similarly situated, into consideration.” Sri Ch.Dhanamjaya, learned Counsel for the petitioner, circulated letter, dated 12-03-2010, to the Registry wherein he stated that his client instructed him to withdraw the Writ Petition in view of the order passed by the Government of A.P., vide G.O.Ms.No.3, dated 11- 03-2010. In view of the same, the Writ Petition is dismissed as withdrawn. As a sequel to dismissal of the Writ Petition, interim order, dated 27-10-2009, is vacated and WPMP.No.30048 of 2009, filed by the petitioner for interim relief, is disposed of as infructuous.