IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction) THURSDAY, THE SIXTEENTH DAY OF JUNE TWO THOUSAND AND FIVE PRESENT THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE ELIPE DHARMA RAO WRIT PETITION No. 3625 of 2005 Between: 1. Mulla Jafar Hussain, S/o. Hachu Bai, R/o. IIIuru Kothapeta, Banaganpalle Mandal, Kurnool District. 2. Mulla Amaruddin, S/o. Jafar Hussain, R/o. IIIuru Kothapeta, Banaganpalle Mandal, Kurnool District. 3. Mulla Majabur Rahiman, S/o. Jaffar Hussain, R/o. IIIuru Kothapeta, Banaganpalle Mandal, Kurnool District. ..... PETITIONERS AND 1. The Mandal Revenue Officer, Banaganipalle, Kurnool District. 2. B. Venkata Subba Reddy, S/o Chinnapulla Reddy, R/o. IIIuru Kothapeta, Banaganipalle Mandal, Kurnool 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 a Writ, order or direction more particularly one in the nature of Writ of Certiorari calling for the records relating to notice issued by the 1st respondent in proceedings R.C.B. No. 185/2003, dated 14-2-2005 to the petitioners is arbitrary, illegal and quash the same. Counsel for the Petitioner: MR.M.B.THIMMA REDDY Counsel for the Respondent No.1: GP FOR REVENUE The Court made the following: ORDER: Aggrieved by the action of the first respondent in issuing the proceedings in R.C.B.No.185/2003, dated 14.2.2005 to the petitioners calling the petitioners for canceling their pattas, as arbitrary and illegal, the present writ petition has been filed. 2 . When the matter was taken up for admission on 25.02.2005, this Court passed an order directing the petitioners to submit necessary explanation in pursuance of the impugned notice. Today, when the matter is taken up for hearing, when the Court asked the learned counsel for the petitioner as to whether the petitioners submitted their explanation. For that, the learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the petitioners have not been submitted any explanation. When once the Court directed the petitioners to submit their explanation, it is for the petitioners to comply with the order of the Court without fail. As the petitioners failed to comply with the orders passed by this Court, this Court is not inclined to proceed further in this writ petition. 3. With the observation stated supra, this court is inclined to dismiss the writ petition since the petitioners have not been complied with the orders passed by this court. 4. Accordingly, the writ petition is dismissed. No order as to costs. ____________________ (ELIPE DHARMA RAO, J) Date: 16.06.2005 Ksn ASSISTANT DREGISTRAR // TRUE COPY // SECTION OFFICER To 1. The Mandal Revenue Officer, Banaganipalle, Kurnool District. 2. 2 CD copies 3. Two CCs to G.P. for Revenue, High Court of A.P., Hyderabad (OUT). Form-NIC-OGS/WP{RLD}