THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE B.PRAKASH RAO And THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE SANJAY KUMAR 13th August 2009 WRIT APPEAL NO.903 of 2002 Between: Sri Laxmi Real Estates, Vijayawada, rep.by its Managing Partner, Smt.Gurram Sri Laxmi Devi, W/o.G.Venkatasubbaiah, 33 years, R/o.Vijayawada, Krishna District. …APPELLANT AND 1. The District Registrar, Eluru, W.G. District. And five others. …RESPONDENTS THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE B.PRAKASH RAO And THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE SANJAY KUMAR WRIT APPEAL NO.903 of 2002 JUDGMENT: (Per the Hon’ble Sri Justice B.Prakash Rao) Heard Sri M.P.Chandramouli, learned counsel for the appellant, the learned Standing Counsel and the learned Government Pleader for Revenue for the respondents. The appellant-writ petitioner seeks to assail the order dated 24.04.2002 in Writ Petition No.6310 of 2002 dismissing the said Writ Petition, wherein the writ petitioner sought a Writ of Mandamus declaring the action of the second respondent as arbitrary and illegal. During the course of the arguments, it has been pointed out that earlier, the same petitioner filed another Writ Petition No.904 of 2002, where the relief was totally different and that too, against the Gram Panchayat, where Notice Before Admission was ordered. In the meanwhile, the Gram Panchayat has considered the request of the petitioner and the said Writ Petition became infructuous. Therefore, the writ petitioner filed an application for withdrawal of Writ Petition No.904 of 2002. When the other matter came up, a wrong mention was made and both the Writ Petitions were taken up for disposal. While dismissing W.P.No.904 of 2002 as withdrawn, the present Writ Petition No.6310 of 2002 was also dismissed. However, on a perusal of the affidavit filed in support of the Writ Petition and the relief sought, it is noticed that both the Writ Petitions stood on a totally different footing. Further, there is no withdrawal letter or any representation on behalf of the petitioner in the present Writ Petition. Certainly, this Writ Petition has to be dealt with independently on merits. Therefore, the order dismissing the Writ Petition, without going into the questions raised by the writ petitioner, is not correct and the matter requires to be reconsidered afresh on merits. Accordingly, the Writ Appeal is allowed. The order dated 24.04.2002 in W.P.No.6310 of 2002 is set aside and the matter is remanded back for fresh consideration and disposal on merits. No costs. _________________ (B.PRAKASH RAO, J) _________________ (SANJAY KUMAR, J) 13th August 2009 RRB