High Court for State of TelanganaWP/22541/2008dismissed as non prosecution

Sabaka Chilakamma v. The Project Officer,

2023-02-14J Sreenivas Rao3 pages

H'GH couRT FoR THE srATE oF TELANGANA AT HyDE*oroJ 33031 (Special Original Jurisdiction) TUESDAY, THE FOURTEENTH DAY OF FEBRUARY TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY THREE PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE J. SREENIVAS RAO WRIT PETITION NO: 22541 OF 2008 Between:

1. Sabaka Chilakamma, Wlo. Late Ramulu Anganwadi Aya, Fl/o. Jayamma Colony, New Palvoncha Mandal, Khammam District.

2. Patham Nageswara Rao, S/o. Patham Narsimhulu Service, R/o. Jayamma Colony, New Palvoncha Mandal, Khammam District. ...PETITIONERS AND

1. The Project Officer, |.T.D.A. Bhadrachalam, Khammam District.

2. The Revenue Divisional Officer, Palvoncha Revenue Division, Palvoncha, Kharnmam District.

3. The Mandal Revenue Officer, Palvoncha Mandal, Khammam District.

4. The District Collector, Collectorate, Vira Road, Kharnmam District.

5. M. Srinivas Rao, S/o. Subbaiah Agriculture R/o. Gattaigudem Village, Palvoncha Mandal, Khammam District.

...RESPONDENTS Petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of lndia prayipg that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed therewith, the High Court may be pleased to issue a writ order or direction particularly one in the nature of writ of Mandamus declaring the action of the respondents in not taking action on_ the application dated 09.04.2007 submitted by the petitioners forwarded by the 1st respondent through proceedings dated 24.04.2007 as illegal arbitrary and contrary to the provisions of Andhra Pradesh Scheduled areas Iand transfer regulation 1959 as amended by regulation l& ll of 1970 and the Andhra Pradesh,schedule Area land transfer rules 1969 and consequently direct the 2nd respondent to consider the dispose the representation dated O9-O4-2OO7 submitted by the petitioner and forwarded by the 4th respondent through the proceedings dated 24.04.2007 in accordance with law.

Counsel for the Petitioners: SRl. P. PRABHAKAR REDDY (NOT PRESENT) Counsel for the Respondent Nos.1 to 4: GP FOR SOCIAL WELFARE Counsel for the Respondent No.5: SRI HARI SREEDHAR The Court made the following: ORDER

HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE J SREENTVAS RAO s41 ORDER:

When the matter is taken up for hearing on 08.02.2023, learned counsel appearing on behalf of Sfr respondent submits that Sth respondent died on 26.08.2OL1 and he furnished the particulars of the legal heirs and also fiIed memo vide USR No.97375 0f 2022 0n 01.11.2022 to the counsel for the petitioners. In spite of the same, the petitioners have not chosen to take steps to bring L.Rs of R-5. To give one opportunity to the petitioners, posted to 10.02.2023 under the caption 'for dismissal'. On LO.O2.2O23 also there was no representation on behalf of the petitioners, To give one more <rpportunity to the petitioners, posted to 14.02.2023. 2.

But today also there is no representation on behalf of the petitioners in the morning and afternoon sessions. 3.

In view of the same, it clearly shows that the petitioners are not having any interest to prosecute the matter. 4.

Accordingly, the writ petition is dismissed for Ronprosecution. There shall be no order as to costs. Miscellaneous applications, pending if any, shall stand closed. SD/. G. SIREESHA //TRUE COPYII ASSISTANT To, 1.

OFFICER Fff"tr*F#gfr*:,"trf ;***";# State of Telangana at 3.

CHR GJP Il

t I HIGH COURT DATED:14102:12023 i{E STA 'F _.- t )- 1(

ORDER

iP 11 hPn ?[?3 W.P.No.22541 of 2008 lt DISMISSING THE WRIT PETITION FOR NON-PROSECUTION WITHOUT COSTS w (-v/?