IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction) FRIDAY, THE SIXTH DAY OF FEBRUARY TWO THOUSAND AND NINE PRESENT THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE C.V.RAMULU WRIT PETITION NO : 18630 of 2008 Between: 1 Pedda Savaranna, S/o. Savarappa, Ro. Palcherla Village of Dharoor Mandal, Mahabubnagar District. 2 Chinna Savaranna, S/o. Savarappa, Ro. Palcherla Village of Dharoor Mandal, Mahabubnagar District. ..... PETITIONERS AND 1 The Government of Andhra Pradesh, Rep. by its Principal Secretary, Revenue & Irrigation Department, Secretariat, Hyderabad. 2 The Special Collector, Land Acquisition, Bheema Project, Mahabubnagar District. 3 The Special Deputy Collector, Land Acquisition, Jawahar Lift Irrigation Project, Gadwal, Mahabubnagar District. 4 Smt. Ananthamma, W/o. Mekalanna @ Savaranna, R/o. Palcherla Village, Dharoor Mandal, Mahabubnagar 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 authorities in referring the matter to Civil Court U/Sec. 30 of Land Acquisition Act, 1894 and disbursement of amount to wrong person i.e., respondent No.4 is illegal, arbitrary and violative of Art. 14, 21 and 300 A of the Constitution of India and consequently direct the respondents No. 1 to 3 to refer the matter to the competent Civil Court U/Sec. 30 of Land Acquisition Act. Counsel for the Petitioners:MR.M.ACHUTA REDDY Counsel for the Respondents: (1) GP FOR LAND ACQUISITION (2) GP FOR IRRIGATION (COMM.AREA GP FOR PANCHAYAT RAJ DEV. & RURAL DEV.) The Court made the following : THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE C.V.RAMULU WRIT PETITION NO.18630 of 2008 ORDER: Learned counsel for the petitioners addressed a letter, dated 05.02.2009, to the Registry stating that he has instructions from the petitioners to withdraw the writ petition as the matter has been compromised outside Court. In view of the above, the writ petition is dismissed as withdrawn. No order as to costs. _____________ C.V.RAMULU,J 06.02.2009 v v