IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction) MONDAY, THE TENTH DAY OF NOVEMBER TWO THOUSAND AND EIGHT PRESENT THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE P.V.SANJAY KUMAR WRIT PETITION NO : 23321 of 2000 Between: 1. M.Ranganayakulu, s/o. late Chinna Anjaneyulu 2. M.Ramanjaneyulu, s/o. late Chinna Anjaneyulu 3. M.Rangappa, s/o. Chinnappa. 4. M.Pedda Anjaneyulu, s/o. Chinna Anjaneyulu 5. M.Chinna Anjappa, s/o. Chinna Anjaneyulu. (All are r/o. Gangulakunta village, Rapthadu Mandal, Anantapur District) ..... PETITIONER AND 1. The Chief Commissioner of Land Administration, A.P., Hyderabad 2. The Director of Survey and Settlements, Govt. of A.P., Hyderabad 3. The District Collector, Anantapur District. 4. The Mandal Revenue Officer, Rapthadu Mandal, Anantapur District. .....RESPONDENTS Petition under Article 226 of the constitution of India praying that in the circumstances stated in the Aﬃdavit ﬁled herein the High Court may be pleased to issue a writ or order or direction more particularly one in the nature of Writ of Certiorari calling for the records relating to order in CCLA’s Ref.No.P1/1318/99, dated 18.07.2000, passed by the 1st respondent by conﬁrming the proceedings of the 2nd respondent in R.P.No.842/84, dated 31.01.1997 and quash the same as illegal, arbitrary and contrary to law and consequently direct the respondents to issue patta in pursuance of the common order dated 13.05.1982 of the Special Oﬃcer and pass such other order or orders. Counsel for the Petitioners:MR.K.B.CHOWDARY Counsel for the Respondents.: GP FOR REVENUE The Court made the following : THE HON’BLE SRI P.V.SANJAY KUMAR WRIT PETITION NO.23321 of 2000 ORDER: There was no representation on behalf of the petitioners when the matter was listed for hearing on 16.09.2008, 26.09.2008, 20.10.2008 and 04.11.2008. In view of the continued lack of representation on behalf of the petitioners, the matter was directed to be listed for dismissal on 10.11.2008. Today also, there is no representation on behalf of the petitioners. It is clear that the petitioners are not interested in prosecuting the matter. The writ petition is, accordingly, dismissed for default. No order as to costs. ______________________ P.V.SANJAY KUMAR,J 10.11.2008 v v