IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction) TUESDAY, THE SECOND DAY OF DECEMBER TWO THOUSAND AND EIGHT PRESENT THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE G.CHANDRAIAH WRIT PETITION NO : 395 of 1999 Between: 1 Ikkurthi Sambasiva Rao S/o Raghavaiah R/o Vellalur, Ponnuru Mandal, Guntur District. 2 Ganipisetti Siva Suryanarayana S/o Venkatadri R/o Vellalur, Ponnuru Mandal, Guntur District. 3 Tanneeru Apparao S/o Naga Bhushnam R/o Vellalur, Guntur District. ..... PETITIONER(S) AND 1 Government of A.P., rep by its Secretary Panchayat Raj Department Secretariat, Hyderabad 2 Gram Panchayat, rep by its Sarpanch Vellalur, Ponnur Mandal, Guntur District. 3 Gandla Papa Rao @ Papaiah S/o Venkatappaiah R/o Vellalur, Ponnur Mandal, Guntur District. 4 Gandla Viswanadham S/o Narsaiah R/o Vellalur, Ponnur Mandal, Guntur District. .....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 appropriate writ, order or direction, especially in the nature of a Writ of Mandamus, declaring that the tanks situate in S.Nos.67 and 69 of Vellalur Village, Ponnuru Mandal, Guntur District are public and communal tanks vested in the Gram Panchayat, Vellalur, under the A.P. Panchayat Raj Act, statutory rights over the said tanks and prevent the respondents 3 and 4 from interfering with its possession, Management and control of the said tank and directing the respondents 3 and 4 not to interfere with fishing rights of the said Gram Panchayat in the said tanks and not to catch fish in the said tanks by sale of fish or otherwise, and pass such other and further orders to meet the ends of justice. Counsel for the Petitioner:MR.K.HARINATH Counsel for the Respondent : GP FOR PANCHAYAT RAJ & RURAL DEV. FOR R The Court made the following : ORDER: Since it was reported that the learned counsel on record by name Sri K.Harinath died on 08-08-2008, this Court directed to issue notices to the petitioners and accordingly, the notices were sent to the petitioners on 20-08-2008 by registered post with acknowledgment due. The notice sent to the first petitioner was served on 30-08-2008 whereas the notices sent to the petitioners 2 and 3 were returned unserved with an endorsement ‘no such addressee’. No one has filed Vakalat on behalf of the first petitioner. No representation for the petitioners. Therefore, the Writ Petition is dismissed for non-prosecution. No costs. __________________ 02nd December, 2008 SKM