IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction) TUESDAY, THE FIFTH DAY OF FEBRUARY TWO THOUSAND AND EIGHT PRESENT THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE C.V.NAGARJUNA REDDY WRIT PETITION No.23218 of 2007 Between: N.Hari and 4 others ..... PETITIONERS AND Tirupathi Urban Development Authority, Rep.by its Vice Chairman, Tirupati, Chittoor District and another .....RESPONDENTS THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE C.V.NAGARJUNA REDDY WRIT PETITION No.23218 of 2007 ORDER: This writ petition is filed for the following substantive reliefs: “Writ of Mandamus declaring the action of the respondents in interfering with the petitioners’ peaceful possession and enjoyment of the land in S.No.623/3L situated at No.29, Tirupathi village accounts of an extent of Ac.0-30 cents purchased vide registered document No.3239/04 dated 28- 12-2001 by 1st petitioner, 2nd petitioner purchased an extent of Ac.0-32½ cents vide registered document No.4709/04 dated 18-2-2002 in S.No.623/3L, 3rd petitioner had purchased an extent of 362.25 square yards as house plot vide registered document No.1364/07 dated 26-02-2007 in S.No.623/3C situated in 19th ward, Tirupathi village accounts, 4th petitioner got the schedule property through will in S.No.623/3 of an extent of Ac.2-00 and 5th petitioner purchased an extent of Ac.0-04 cents vide registered document No.1669/81 dated 10-04-1981 and from the date of purchase all the petitioners are in peaceful possession and enjoyment of the property at present the 1st respondent forcibly want to interfere with the above schedule property for public purpose without following the procedure, with the help of respondent No.2, as arbitrary, illegal, unconstitutional being violative of Articles 14, 21 and 300(A) of the constitution of India and consequently direct the respondents not to interfere with the peaceful possession and enjoyment of the schedule property in S.No.623/3L, 623/3C, 623/3 of an extent of Ac.0-30 cents, 32½ cents, 362.25 square yards and 0-04 cents” Sri P.Jagadish Chandra Prasad, learned counsel for the petitioners, stated that in view of the averments contained in paragraph No.9 of the counter affidavit filed by the Vice Chairman of respondent No.1 authority, the issues raised in this writ petition need not be gone into by this Court at this stage, and the writ petition may be closed with liberty to the petitioner to approach this Court as and when the respondents interfere with the property of the petitioners for the purpose of laying road. Therefore, without going into the merits of the case, the Writ Petition is closed with liberty in terms of the request made by the petitioner. As a sequel of closure of this writ petition, WPMP.30254/2007 stands dismissed as infructuous. ____________________________ C.V.NAGARJUNA REDDY,J Dated: 05.02.2008 Dsr