THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE C.V.NAGARJUNA REDDY Writ Petition No.26299 of 2008 Dated 26th April, 2011 Between: Daggupati Ramalakshmamma …Petitioner And The Revenue Divisional Officer, Rajampet, Cuddapah District-cum- Land Acquisition Officer and others …Respondents Counsel for the petitioner: Sri P.Sree Ramulu Naidu Counsel for respondents: Sri O.Manoher Reddy The Court made the following: ORDER: At the interlocutory stage, the writ petition is taken up for hearing and disposal with the consent of the learned counsel for the parties. This writ petition is filed for the following substantive relief: “…to issue a Writ or order or direction, more particularly one in the nature of Writ of Mandamus declaring the action of the respondents in not paying the amount of compensation for the lands of Acs.4.34 cents acquired for the purpose of construction of 220/132 K.V Sub-station at (Kuchivaripalli) Rajampet, Kadapa District, in Survey No.392/1 as being illegal, arbitrary and contrary to the provisions of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 and against Articles 14, 21 and 300-A of the Constitution of India and consequently direct the respondents to pay the compensation to the petitioner as per the present market value for the land of Acs.4.34 cents with all statutory benefits under the provisions of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894.” At the hearing, Sri P.Sree Ramulu Naidu, learned counsel for the petitioner, submitted that after filing of the present writ petition, he came to know that the petitioner has filed W.P.No.20573 of 2007 for the same relief which is claimed in the present writ petition. He is however unable to state the reason therefor. The learned counsel requested the Court to permit the petitioner to withdraw the present writ petition with liberty to pursue W.P.No.20573 of 2007. Even though the conduct of the petitioner in filing the present writ petition is wholly unsatisfactory, keeping in view the age of the petitioner and the request of the learned counsel for the petitioner, the writ petition is dismissed as withdrawn with liberty in terms of the prayer made. As a sequel to dismissal of the writ petition, W.P.M.P.No.34433 of 2008 filed by the petitioner for interim relief is disposed of as infructuous. C.V.NAGARJUNA REDDY, J 26th April, 2011 VGB