IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction) MONDAY, THE TWENTY NINETH DAY OF SEPTEMBER TWO THOUSAND AND EIGHT PRESENT THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE C.V.NAGARJUNA REDDY WRIT PETITION NO:2293 of 2002 Between: 1 Peddagoni Satamma W/o Late Anthaiah R/o Khajaguda Villaage, Serilingampalli Mandlal R.R.District. 2 P.Kommaraiah S/o Late Anthaiah R/o Khajaguda Villaage, Serilingampalli Mandlal R.R.District. 3 P.Kommaramma W/o Late Omkaram R/o Khajaguda Villaage, Serilingampalli Mandlal R.R.District. 4 P.Yelamaiah S/o Late Anthaiah R/o Khajaguda Villaage, Serilingampalli Mandlal R.R.District. 5 P.Sankar S/o late Anthaiah R/o Khajaguda Villaage, Serilingampalli Mandlal R.R.District. 6 P.Jairam S/o late Anthaiah R/o Khajaguda Villaage, Serilingampalli Mandlal R.R.District. ..... PETITIONERS AND 1 The Mandal Revenue Officer Serilingampally Mandal, R.R.District. 2 The Revenue Divisional Officer, Chevella R.R.District. 3 The District Collector Ranga Reddy District. .....RESPONDENTS Counsel for the Petitioners:MR.P.SRI RAGHU RAM Counsel for the Respondents: AGP FOR REVENUE The Court made the following : ORDER: This writ petition is ﬁled for the following substantive relief: “It is therefore prayed that this Hon’ble Court may be pleased to issue a writ, order or direction more particularly one in the nature of Writ of Mandamus to direct the respondents herein not to dispossess or evict the petitioners without due process of law in Sy.No.117/3/16 (New) and the old Sy.No.17 of an extent of Acs.4.02 gts situated at Khajaguda Village, Serilingampalli Mandal, Ranga Reddy District.” At the hearing, Sri P.Sri Raghu Ram, learned counsel for the petitioners submitted that after ﬁling of the writ petition, the names of the petitioners were mutated in the revenue record. In view of the same, the cause in the writ petition does not survive for consideration. However, if the respondents seek to dispossess the petitioners, they can do so only by following due process of law. Subject to the above observations, the writ petition is disposed of. As a sequel to disposal of main petition, interim order, dated 18.04.2002 is vacated, WPMP.No.2683 of 2002 is dismissed and WPMP.Nos.18198 of 2005, 18814 of 2006 and 11398 of 2007 are disposed of as infructuous. C.V.NAGARJUNA REDDY, J 29th SEPTEMBER, 2008. kvni