IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction) FRIDAY, THE TENTH DAY OF OCTOBER TWO THOUSAND AND EIGHT PRESENT THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE P.V.SANJAY KUMAR WRIT PETITION No: 22182 of 2008 BETWEEN: Jakka Pedda Venkanna S/o. Ramanna R/o. Bodigagudem Village, Koyyalagudem Mandalam, W.G. District. ... PETITIONER AND 1 The Superintendent of Police, Eluru, W.G. District. 2 The Station House Officer, Koyyalagudem P.S, W.G. District. 3 Ekula Rambabu S/o. Mukkaiah, W.G. District. ...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 appropriate writ order or Direction more particularly one in the nature of writ of Mandamus declaring the inaction of the respondent Nos. 1 and 2 herein in not taking any action on the complaint dt. 19-9-2008 given by the petitioner Petitioner against the 3rd respondent and his family members, as illegal, arbitrary, unjust and consequently direct the respondent Nos. 1 and 2 to register a case against the 3rd Respondent pursuant to the complaint dt. 19-9-2008 and to grant such other order or orders. Counsel for the Petitioner: MR.B.CHANDRA SHEKHAR Counsel for the Respondents: GP FOR HOME The Court made the following: ORDER: The grievance of the petitioner in this case is with regard to the alleged inaction of the police authorities upon his complaint dated 19.09.2008, whereby the petitioner leveled certain allegations against one Sri Ekula Rambabu – third respondent in this writ petition, relating to his interference with the lands taken on lease by the petitioner from the Endowments Department. 2. When the matter came up before this Court, the learned Government Pleader for Home stated, on instructions, that pursuant to the complaint of the petitioner dated 07.10.2008 a crime has been registered under FIR.No.123 of 2008 dated 07.10.2008 against the third respondent and necessary investigation has been made thereafter and the third respondent is also arrested. 3. In the light of this development nothing survives for consideration in the present writ petition. The writ petition is accordingly dismissed. There shall be no order as to costs. __________________ P.V. SANJAY KUMAR, J October 10, 2008 DSK