IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction) MONDAY, THE SEVENTEENTH DAY OF JANUARY TWO THOUSAND AND FIVE PRESENT THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE R.SUBHASH REDDY WRIT PETITION NO: 4629 of 1995 Between: Omkardas Mahant, S/o Mannadasji, Gangaram Mutt, Patnoolu Street, Tirupati, Chittoor dist. ..... PETITIONER AND 1 The District Collector, Chittoor, Chittoor dist. 2 The Mandal Revenue Officer, Tirupati Urban (M), Chittoor Dist. 3 The Tirumala Tirupati Devasthanams Rep by Executive Officer, Tirupati, Chittoor Dist. .....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 an order or direction more in the nature of writ of Mandamus or any other appropriate relief, declaring the action of the 1st respondent in converting the Bramhadayam Properties of the petitioner covered by the Title Deed No. 2539 dt 4.4.1865 relating to R.S.Nos.905, 581-A, 581-B, 581-C, 583, 584, 585, 586, 588-A, 588-B and 589 to an extent of Ac.0.38 cents, Ac. 55.10 cents Ac.35.20 cents, Ac.164.20 cents, Ac. 69.35 cents Ac.28.04 cents Ac. 27.18 cents, Ac.38.78 cents Ac.1,281-52 cents Ac. 13.47 cents and Ac. 1105-92 cents, respectively into Devadayam contrary to the Provisions of Inams Abolition Act and Estates Abolition without notice to the petitioner and without payment of any compensation as highly illegal, wholly arbitrary ,and unconstitutional being in violation of Arts 14, 21 and 300-A of the Constitution of India, and also in violation of principles of natural justice and consequently direct the respondents to fix the appropriate compensation as per the Market value till then not to interfere with the peaceful possession and enjoyment of the petitioner relating to the aforesaid lands. Counsel for the Petitioner: MR.D.RAMESH Counsel for the Respondent Nos.1 and 2: THE G.P. FOR REVENUE Counsel for the Respondent No.3: MR.M.ADINARAYANA RAJU The Court made the following: ORDER: It is stated by the learned counsel appearing for the respondents that the only petitioner in this writ petition died in the year 1998 but no steps have been taken so far to bring his legal representatives on record. In that view of the matter, the writ petition is dismissed as abated. No order as to costs. _____________________ R.SUBHASH REDDY, J 17.01.2005 DR To 1 The District Collector, Chittoor, Chittoor dist. 2 The Mandal Revenue Officer, Tirupati Urban (M), Chittoor Dist. 3 The Executive Officer, Tirumala Tirupati Devasthanams, Tirupati, Chittoor Dist. 4 Two CD copies. 5 Two CCs to Government Pleader for Revenue, High Court Buildings, Hyderabad. (OUT)