IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction) FRIDAY, THE TWENTY SIXTH DAY OF JUNE TWO THOUSAND AND NINE PRESENT THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE C.V.RAMULU WRIT PETITION No.15923 of 2003 Between: 1 Bhajantri Anantagiri S/o. Hanumanthappa Havaligi Vidapanakal Mandal Anantapur District. 2 B.Huleppa S/o.Anantagiri Havaligi Vidapanakal Mandal Anantapur District. 3 G.Prasanth s/o.Geerla Sivasankar Havaligi Vidapanakal Mandal Anantapur District. 4 G.Virupaksh S/o.G.Mariswamy Havaligi Vidapanakal Mandal Anantapur District. ..... PETITIONERS AND 1 The District Collector Anantapur District. 2 The Mandal Revenue officer, Vidapanakal Mandal, Anantapur Dist. 3 The Asst.Commissioner of Endowments, Anantapur. 4. Sri Anjaneya Swamy Temple, Havaligi (V), Vidapanakal (M), Anantapur District, rep. By its Executive Officer Sri G.Bhaskaraiah S/o. G.Pandurangam, 39 years, Group Temples, Uravakonda, Anantapur District. (Respondent No.4 is impleaded as per court order dated 24.11.2003 in WPMP.No.27325 of 2003) .....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 Mandamus declaring the action of the respondents in issuing proceedings in Rc.No.145/j/2001-2002, dated 23-10-2002 through which identifying the lands of Anjaneyaswamy Temple of Havaligi village, Vidapanakal Mandal, Anantapur District in an extent of Ac.48.00 cents in survey No.99 for alternating to the S.C Corporation as illegal, arbitrary and consequently set aside the same and pass such other order or orders. Counsel for the Petitioners: SRI K.SITA RAM Counsel for the Respondents: GP FOR REVENUE The Court made the following : THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE C.V. RAMULU WRIT PETITION No.15923 of 2003 ORDER: Sri K. Sita Ram, learned counsel for the petitioners, submits that the cause in the writ petition does not survive for adjudication. Recording his submission, the writ petition is dismissed as infructuous. No order as to costs. ____________ C.V.RAMULU,J 26.06.2009 v v