IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction) TUESDAY, THE TWENTY EIGHTH DAY OF APRIL TWO THOUSAND AND NINE PRESENT THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE GODA RAGHURAM WRIT PETITION NO : 24343 of 2008 Between: 1 Pujari Pakeeraiah, S/o.Late Narasimhulu, R//o. Suraram Village, Balanagar Mandal, Mahaboobnagar District. 2 Smt. Pujari Chandramma, W/o. Late Jangaiah, R//o. Suraram Village, Balanagar Mandal, Mahaboobnagar District. 3 Pujari Venkataiah, S/o. late Jangaiah, R//o. Suraram Village, Balanagar Mandal, Mahaboobnagar District. 4 Pujari Narasimha, S/o. late Jangaiah, R//o. Suraram Village, Balanagar Mandal, Mahaboobnagar District. 5 Smt. Pujari Narasamma, W/o. Late Chennaiah, R//o. Suraram Village, Balanagar Mandal, Mahaboobnagar District. ..... PETITIONER(S) AND 1 The District Collector, Mahaboobnagar District, Mahaboobnagar. 2 The Tahsildar, Farooq nagar Mandal, Mahaboobnagar District. 3 The Mandal Revenue Inspector, Farooq nagar Mandal, Mahaboobnagar District. .....RESPONDENT(S) Petition under Article 226 of the constitution of India praying that in the circumstances stated in the Affidavit filed herein the High Court will be pleased to to issue an appropriate Writ, Order or Direction, more particularly one in the nature of Writ of Mandamus, declaring the inaction on the part of the Respondent Nos.1 and 2 herein in not to consideringthe representation dated 19-9-2008 submitted by the petitioners as illegal, arbitrary, unconstitutional and against to the principles of natural justice and cosequently direct the Respondent Nos 1 and 2 to pass appropriate orders on the representation dated 19-9-2008 by affording reasonable opportunity to the petitioners herein, and to grant such other relief or reliefs Counsel for the Petitioner:MR.E.PEDDANNA Counsel for the Respondent No.: GP FOR REVENUE The Court made the following : Oral order: There being no representation in this writ petition, filed in November, 2008 when called for admission on 27-4-2009, the writ petition is directed to be posted on 28-4-2009 for dismissal. When called today, there is no representation on behalf of the petitioners, though the writ petition is listed under the caption ‘for dismissal’. In the circumstances, the writ petition is dismissed for default. No costs. ________________________ GODA RAGHURAM, J 28th April, 2009. GRR