IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction) TUESDAY, THE FIFTH DAY OF JULY TWO THOUSAND AND FIVE PRESENT THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE R.SUBHASH REDDY WRIT PETITION NO : 187 of 2000 Between: 1 P.V.Muralidhar Raju S/o P.Venkatarama Raju R/o.Tirupathi, Chittoor District. 2 P.M.Harish S/o P.V.Muralidhar Raju Rep. by his Natural Guardian his Father the 1st Petitioner, R/o.Tirupathi, Chittoor District. 3 P.C.Sohan Krishna S/o.P.V.Chathrapathi Raju Rep. by his Natural Guardian his Father P.V.Chatrapathi Raju R/o.Tirupathi, Chittoor District. ..... PETITIONERS AND 1 The District Collector Nellore District. 2 The Mandal Revenue Officer Venkatagiri Mandal, Nellore District. 3 Government of Andhra Pradesh, Roads & Buildings Department Rep. by its Executive Engineer, Venkatagiri, Nellore District. 4 Chevireddipalli Gram Panchyat, Rep. by its Sarpanch Venkatagiri Mandal, Nellore District, Nellore. .....RESPONDENTS Petition under Article 226 of the constitution of India praying that in the circumstances stated in the Affidavit filed herein the High Court will be pleased to pass Writ, Order or Direction more particularly in the nature of Writ of Mandamus directing the Respondents not to lay road across "Ashawari Kunta" in Sy.No.51 to T.T.D.Kalyana Mandapam in Sy.No.50, which will affect Sy.No.50/1A & 50/1B of Chevireddipalle Village, Venkatagiri Mandal, Nellore District after declaring the action of the Respondents in proposing to lay the road in the lands of the Petitioners in Suy.No.50/1A & Sy.No.50/1B, without any notice or opportunity, as illegal, arbitrary and against Principles of Natural Justice and also amounts to infringement of Rights under Article 300-A of Constitution of India. Counsel for the Petitioners: MR.B.SUDHAKAR REDDY & NEERAJA REDDY Counsel for the Respondents: GP FOR ROADS & BUILDINGS The Court made the following: ORDER: This writ petition was listed for hearing on 30.06.2005. On that day, as there was no representation on behalf of either counsel, it was posted today “for dismissal”. Even today also, when the matter is called, there is no representation on behalf of the petitioner. The writ petition is accordingly dismissed for non-prosecution. No order as to costs. ___________________ R.SUBHASH REDDY, J 05.07.2005 DR To 1 The District Collector Nellore District. 2 The Mandal Revenue Officer Venkatagiri Mandal, Nellore District. 3 The Executive Engineer, Government of Andhra Pradesh, Roads & Buildings Department Venkatagiri, Nellore District. 4 The Sarpanch, Chevireddipalli Gram Panchyat, Venkatagiri Mandal, Nellore District, Nellore. 5 2 CCs to G.P. for Roads and Buildings, High Court Buildings, Hyderabad. (OUT) 6 2 CD copies