IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction) MONDAY, THE TWENTY THIRD DAY OF JUNE TWO THOUSAND AND EIGHT PRESENT THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE N.V. RAMANA WRIT PETITION NO : 195 of 2008 Between: 1 Yellamelli Sambamurthy, S/o.Y.Tatayya(Late) R/o.Doddavaram(V), Mamidikuduru(M), E.G Dist 2 Rokkala Srinivas, S/o.Narasimha Murthy(Late), R/o.B.Doddavaram(V),Mamidikuduru(M), E.G Dist ..... PETITIONER(S) AND 1 The Dist Collector,E.G Dist Kakinada 2 The Revenue Divisional Officer, Amalapuram,E.G Dist 3 The Tahsildar,Mamidikuduri(M), E.G Dist 4 The Village Revenue Officer, B.Doddavaram Mamidikuduru(M),E.G Dist .....RESPONDENT(S) 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 to issue writ order or direction more particularly one in the nature of writ of Mandamus,declare the action of the respondent No.4 in issuing a Tom Tom in the D.Doddavaram(V) Mamidikuduru(M),E.G Dist not to enter into the land admeasuring Ac.0-50 cents each in S.No.87/2 and 87/4 of B.Doddavaram(V),Mamidikuduru(M) E.G Dist dispite restoring the assignment in favour of the petitioner vide proceedings of the 3rd respondent in Ref.No.26/2007 dt.30-8-2007 as illegal,arbitrary,without jurisdiction and contrary to the provisions of A.P.Assigned Lands (POT) Act,1977 and to grant such other relief or reliefs Counsel for the Petitioner:MR.GEDDAMSATISH BABU Counsel for the Respondent No.: GP FOR REVENUE The Court made the following : THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE N.V. RAMANA Writ Petition No. 195 of 2008 Order: Questioning the action of respondent No.4-Village Revenue Officer, directing the petitioners by beat of tom-tom not to enter into the land admeasuring Ac.0.50 cents each in Survey No.87/2 and 87/4 of B. Doddavaram village, Mamidikuduru Mandal, East Godavari District, despite restoring the assignment in their favour, vide proceedings dated 30.08.2007 of respondent No.3-Tahsildar, the present writ petition is filed. A detailed counter affidavit is filed by respondent Nos.1 to 3. It is stated in the counter affidavit that the petitioners are in possession and enjoyment of the land in question and that respondent No.4 never interfered with their possession. When the matter is taken up for admission today, learned counsel for the petitioners submits that in view of the statement made by respondent Nos.1 to 3 in their counter affidavit, no orders need be passed in this writ petition. Recording the said submission, the writ petition is closed. No costs. ___________________ N.V. RAMANA, J. Date: 23.06.2008 Nsr