IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction) FRIDAY, THE TWENTIETH DAY OF JUNE TWO THOUSAND AND EIGHT PRESENT THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE C.V.NAGARJUNA REDDY WRIT PETITION NO : 8274 of 2005 Between: 1 B. Venkat Reddy, S/o. Gattu Bheemanna, Nallabai, H/o. Gulya Baig, Dharoor Mandal, Mahaboobnagar District. 2 Muneppa, S/o. Nalla Reddy @ Nallanna, Nallabai, H/o. Gulya Baig, Dharoor Mandal, Mahaboobnagar District. 3 Hanumanthu, S/o. Gattu Bheemanna, Nallabai, H/o. Gulya Baig, Dharoor Mandal, Mahaboobnagar District. 4 Muneppa, s/o. Hanumanna, Nallabai, H/o. Gulya Baig, Dharoor Mandal, Mahaboobnagar District. 5 Rangareddy, S/o. Narsappa, Nallabai, H/o. Gulya Baig, Dharoor Mandal, Mahaboobnagar District. 6 Hanmanthu, S/o. Govindu, Nallabai, H/o. Gulya Baig, Dharoor Mandal, Mahaboobnagar District. 7 Venkataramudu, S/o. Rama, Nallabai, H/o. Gulya Baig, Dharoor Mandal, Mahaboobnagar District. 8 Mirja Anwar Baib, S/o. Mirja Gulya Baig, Nallabai, H/o. Gulya Baig, Dharoor Mandal, Mahaboobnagar District. ..... PETITIONERS AND 1 Govt. of A.P. Rep by Secretary, (Projects Wing) Department, Land Acquisition, Secretariat, Hyderabad. 2 The Engineer-in-Chief, Irrigation Wing, Erram Manzil, Hyderabad. 3 The Special Collector, Srisailam Project, Kurnool, Kurnool District. 4 The Special Deputy Collector, Priyadarsini, Jurala Project, Gadwal, Mahaboobnagar District. .....RESPONDENTS Counsel for the Petitioners:MR.S.VENKATESWARA REDDY Counsel for the Respondents: GP FOR LAND ACQUISITION The Court made the following : ORDER: This writ petition is filed for the following substantive relief: “For the reasons stated in the accompanying affidavit, thepetitioners herein pray that this Hon’ble Court may be pleased to issue a Writ, order or direction more particularly one in the nature of Writ of Mandamus declaring the action of the Respondents herein in not depositing the balance of decretal amounts as illegal and consequently direct the respondents herein to deposit the balance of decretal amounts granted in O.P.Nos.185, 187, 189, 190, 191, 193 of 1992 and 464 of 1994, dated 25.10.1995 and batch on the file of Subordinate Judge, Gadwal.” Sri S.Venkateswara Reddy, learned counsel for the petitioners submits that the cause in the writ petition does not survive for consideration. In view of the submission of the learned counsel, the writ petition is dismissed as infructuous. As a sequel to dismissal of main petition as infructuous, WPMP.No.21558 of 2005 filed by the petitioners for interim relief is disposed of as infructuous. C.V.NARAGJUNA REDDY, J 20th June, 2008. kvni