IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction) MONDAY, THE THIRTIETH DAY OF JUNE TWO THOUSAND AND EIGHT PRESENT THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE C.V.NAGARJUNA REDDY WRIT PETITION NO : 23869 of 2005 Between: Birudavou Subba Reddy, S/o. Ramana Reddy, R/o. Utukur Village, Vidavalur Mandal, Nellore Dist. ..... PETITIONER AND 1 The District Collector, Nellore Dist. 2 The Mandal Revenue Officer, Vidavalur Mandal, Vidavalur. 3 Gundapau Manjula, W/o. Dayakar Rao, R/o. Utukur Village, Vidavalur Mandal, Nellore Dist. 4 Palepu Prameelama, W/o. Arunachalam, Utukur Village, Vidavalur Mandal, Nellore Dist. 5 Padmasetty Satyanarayana, S/o. Sarangapani, Utukur Village, Vidavalur Mandal, Nellore. 6 Ramireddy Ramachandra Reddy, S/o. Latcha Reddy, Utukur Village, Vidavalur Mandal, Nellore Dist. ....RESPONDENTS Counsel for the Petitioner:MR.M.V.S.SURESH KUMAR Counsel for Respondents 1 & 2: GP FOR REVENUE The Court made the following : O R D E R: At the interlocutory stage, the writ petition itself is taken up for hearing and disposal with the consent of the learned counsel for the parties. This writ petition is filed for a writ of Mandamus to declare the inaction of respondent No.2 in demolishing the fish ponds in pursuance of directions contained in proceedings dated 22-03-2005 and 06-07-2005 issued by respondent No.1 as illegal and arbitrary. In the counter-affidavit filed by respondent No.2, in paragraph 3, it is stated that as respondent No.3 failed to remove the fish ponds, they were demolished on 29-11-2005, 30-11-2005 and 01-12-2005, under the cover of a panchanama. Having regard to these averments, learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the cause in the writ petition does not survive for consideration. Hence, the writ petition is dismissed as infructuous. As a sequel to dismissal of main petition as infructuous, WPMP No.30651 of 2005 filed by the petitioner for interim relief is disposed of as infructuous. C.V.NAGARJUNA REDDY,J Dated 30th June, 2008 vrn