IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction) THURSDAY, THE NINETEENTH DAY OF FEBRUARY TWO THOUSAND AND NINE PRESENT THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE C.V.NAGARJUNA REDDY WRIT PETITION No.20682 of 1999 Between: FEERO ELECTICALS LTD., REP.BY ITS DIRECTOR SRI K.RANAGATHAN PLOT NO.B/11/1, IDA.,UPPAL, R.R.DISTRICT ..... PETITIONER AND 1 GOVERNMENT OF A.P., REP.BY ITS SECRETARY REVENUE (UC-II) DEPARTMENT ,SECRETARIAT GOVERNMENT OF AP., HYDERABAD 2 SPECIAL OFFICER & COMPETENT AUTHORITY, URBAN LAND CELING CHANDRA VIHAR, M.J.ROAD, HYDERABAD 3 COMMISSIONERS OF A.P., CHIRAGALI LANE, HYDERABAD ....RESPONDENTS Counsel for the Petitioner:MR. B.SRINIVAS FOR MR.K.R.PRABHAKAR Counsel for Respondents 1 & 2:MR. O.MANOHAR REDDY The Court made the following : ORDER: This writ petition is filed for a writ of mandamus to set aside notice, dated 24.08.1999 whereby respondent No.2 directed the petitioner to surrender the land admeasuring 15187.44 sq.meters forming part of plot No.B/11/1, IDA, Uppal. On 06.10.1999, this Court granted an order of status quo obtaining as on that day regarding possession of the petitioner for a period of four weeks and the said order was extended subsequently on 31.12.1999 till further orders. It is not in dispute that the said order is subsisting as on today. At the hearing, the learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that though notice under Section 10(5) of the Urban Land (Ceiling and Regulation) Act, 1976 (for short ‘the Act’) was issued, which is impugned in this writ petition, in view of the order of status quo granted by this Court, possession has not been taken by the respondents. The learned counsel representing the respondents did not deny this statement of the learned counsel for the petitioner. In view of resolution of the Andhra Pradesh State Legislative Assembly passed on 27.03.2008 and consequential G.O.Ms.No.603, dated 22.04.2008 issued by the Government adopting Repeal Act No.15 of 1999, the proceedings initiated under the Act have got abated, as possession has not been taken by the respondents in pursuance of notice issued under Section 10(5) of the Act. In view of the same, the writ petition is disposed of by declaring that the proceedings initiated under the Act have got abated. C.V.NAGARJUNA REDDY, J 19th FEBRUARY, 2009. kvni