THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE C.V.NAGARJUNA REDDY Writ Petition No.31988 of 2011 Dated 22nd December, 2011 Between: Kakarla Venktaeswarlu …Petitioner And The District Collector, Nalgonda District and others …Respondents Counsel for the petitioner: --- Counsel for respondents: AGP for Land Acquisition The Court made the following: ORDER: This writ petition is filed for the following substantive relief: “…to issue an appropriate Writ, Order or Director, more particularly one in the nature of Writ of Mandamus, to declare the memo, dated 24.01.2011, bearing No.C/1338/09 issued by the 2nd respondent and the consequential seizure notice, dated 21.03.2011 issued by the 3rd respondent threatening to seize the petitioner’s property for recovery of the amount of Rs.4,08,244/- paid to him towards compensation by initiating the proceedings under Revenue Recovery Act as being illegal, arbitrary and unconstitutional and consequently set aside the same by directing the respondents not to take any coercive steps against the petitioner herein.” On 05.12.2011, this Court while declining to interfere with the impugned action of the respondents adjourned the case to enable the learned counsel for the petitioner to report to the Court as to the time frame within which his client is prepared to pay back the money received by him under the mistaken impression that his property is under acquisition. On 15.12.2011, a request was made by the learned counsel for the petitioner for an adjournment and accordingly the case was adjourned. Today, both in the forenoon and afternoon, there has been no representation for the petitioner. Hence, it is reasonable to presume that the petitioner is not interested in pursuing his cause in the writ petition. The writ petition is accordingly dismissed for non-prosecution. As a sequel to dismissal of the writ petition, W.P.M.P.No.39711 of 2011 is disposed of as infructuous. C.V.NAGARJUNA REDDY, J 22nd December, 2011 VGB