IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction) SATURDAY, THE SIXTH DAY OF SEPTEMBER TWO THOUSAND AND EIGHT PRESENT THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE GODA RAGHURAM And THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE P.V.SANJAY KUMAR WRIT PETITION NO.18610 of 2000 Between: C. Srinivasa Raju S/o C.Veerabhadra Rao R/o 8-177, Ravi Nagar, Naidu Thota, Vepagunta Pendurthy Mandal, Visakhapatnam District. ...PETITIONER AND 1 Government of A.P. Rep. by its Principal Secretary (Revenue) Secretariat Bldgs, Hyderabad. 2 The Commissioner & Inspector General of Registration & Stamps, A.P. Hyderabad. 3 The Collector, Visakhapatnam. 4 The Executive Officer, Sri Varaha Laxmi Narasimha Swamy Devasthanam, Simachalam, Visakhapatnam. 5 The Inspector General of Registration & Stamps, Hyderabad. 6 The District Registrar, Visakhapatnam. 7 The Sub-Registrar, Gopalapatnam, Visakhapatnam. ...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 issue any appropriate writ, order or direction preferably a writ in the nature of Writ of Certiorari by declaring Section 22-A of Indian Registration Act 1908 (Inserted by A.P. Act 4 of 1999 w.e.f. 1-4-1999) as being illegal, arbitrary unconstitutional and violative of Art. 14 and 300-A of the Constitution and consequently Quash the G.O.Ms.No. 509 dt. 28-7-2000 by directing the 7th respondent to forthwith receive, register and release the document of sale in favour of petitioner inrespect of property to an extent of Ac. 10-00 in Sy.No. 77/10-A1, 77/10-A4 77/10-A5 and 77/10- A7 situated at Vepagunta village, Pendurthy Mandal, Visakhapatnam District and pass such other order or orders as deem fit and proper. Counsel for the Petitioner: MR.R.M.REDDY Counsel for the Respondents: MR.M.ADINARAYANA RAJU The Court made the following: THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE GODA RAGHURAM AND THE HON’BLE MR JUSTICE P.V.SANJAY KUMAR WRIT PETITION NO.18610 of 2000 ORDER: When the matter is called, none appears for the petitioner nor there is any representation. Hence, the Writ Petition is dismissed for default. The interim order granted on 27.07.2001 stands dissolved. __________________ (GODA RAGHURAM, J) ___________________ (P.V.SANJAY KUMAR, J) 6th September 2008 RRB