IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction) FRIDAY, THE NINETEENTH DAY OF SEPTEMBER TWO THOUSAND AND EIGHT PRESENT THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE C.V.NAGARJUNA REDDY WRIT PETITION NO : 19415 of 2001 Between: M/s. Mythrae Reddy, D/o. Sri B.G.K.Reddy, R/o. Plot No.39, Sagar Society, Road no.2, Banjara Hills, Hyderabad rep. By her G.P.A P.Diwakar Reddy, S/o. P.Suryanarayana Reddy, aged 51 years, R/o. Hyderabad. ..... PETITIONER AND 1 Government of Andhra Pradesh, rep. by its Principal Secretary, Revenue Department, Secretariat, Hyderabad. 2 District Collector, Hyderabad, Hyderabad district. 3 Mandal Revenue Officer, Shaikpet Mandal, Banjara Hills, Hyderabad. ...RESPONDENTS Counsel for the Petitioner:MR.T.N.GANGULY FOR MR V.PATTABHI Counsel for the respondents: The Court made the following : O R D E R: This writ petition is ﬁled for the following substantive relief: “It is therefore prayed that this Hon’ble Court may in the interests of Justice be pleased to issue a writ, order or direction, one more in the nature of a writ of Mandamus, or any other appropriate writ, calling for the records relating to the claim of the petitioner seeking regularization of her possession and enjoyment over her land admeasuring about 1560 square yards in S.No.403/1/paiki, Shaikpet Village, Hyderabad District, and declare the action of the respondents in not regularizing her possession as arbitrary, irrational and discriminatory and as such violative of Article 14 of the Constitution of India and to consequently declare that she is entitled to regularization of her possession as the said land by her paying compensation at the rate of Rs.1,000/- per square meter to the State Government.” At the hearing, Sri T.N.Ganguly, learned counsel representing Sri V.Pattabhi, learned counsel for the petitioner, submitted that Sri V.Pattabhi is no longer appearing in the case and that the party was informed about the same earlier. Since no alternative arrangement is made by the petitioner to represent her case, the writ petition is dismissed for non-prosecution. C.V.NAGARJUNA REDDY, J Dated 19th September, 2008 vrn