APHC010369292013 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) [3330] WEDNESDAY, THE SEVENTEENTH DAY OF JUNE TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY SIX PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE TARLADA RAJASEKHAR RAO WRIT PETITION NO: 38600/2013 Between: 1. MARUPILLA JYOTHI, W/O. LATE M. JAYAPAUL, AGED: 50 YEARS, HOUSEHOLD, R/O. D. NO. 1-49-4/1 MVP COLONY, SECTOR-1, VISAKHAPATNAM, VISAKHAPATNAM DISTRICT. ...PETITIONER AND 1. GOVT OF ANDHRA PRADESH, REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY, ENDOWMENT DEPARTMENT, SECRETARIAT, HYDERABAD-04. 2. SRI DURGA MALLESHWARASWAMY DEVASTHANAM, REPRESENTED BY ITS ADMINISTRATIVE OFFICER, INDRA KEELADRI, VIJAYAWADA, KRISHNA DISTRICT 520 001. 3. THE DISTRICT COLLECTOR KRISHNA DISTRICT VIJAYAWADA 520 001, - 4. THE TASHILDAR, VIJAYAWADA URBAN, VIJAYAWADA, KRISHNA DISTRICT 520 001. 5. THE SUB REGISTRAR, VIJAYAWADA URBAN, VIJAYAWADA, KRISHNA DISTRICT 520 001. ...RESPONDENT(S): Petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed therewith, the High Court may be pleased toto issue a Writ, order or direction more particularly one in the nature of Writ of Mandamus declaring the action of the Respondent No. 2 in making a claim over the land adm. AC 02- 39C in Sy. No. 96/1 situated at Vidyadhavapuram, Vijayawada Urban, Respondent No. 3 not clarifying the rival Claims, and the Respondent No. 5 in trying to create third party rights in the said property as arbitrary, illegal, unjust and violative of Article 300 A of the Constitution of India and consequently direct the Respondent No. 4 to clarify the 2 rival claims of the petitioner and the Respondent No. 2 Devasthanam and pass. IA NO: 1 OF 2013(WPMP 47975 OF 2013 Petition under Section 151 CPC praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed in support of the petition, the High Court may be pleased to grant interim directions directing the respondents not to interfere or create third party rights in the land adm. AC 02-39C in Sy. No. 96/1 situated at Vidyadharapuram, Vidayawada Urban, Krishna District and pass. Counsel for the Petitioner: 1. C M R VELU Counsel for the Respondent(S): 1. K MADHAVA REDDY (SC FOR ENDOWMENTS AR) 2. GP FOR ENDOWMENTS The Court made the following: 3 THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE TARLADA RAJASEKHAR RAO WRIT PETITION NO: 38600 of 2013 ORDER: Sri P.Durga Rao, learned counsel, representing Sri C.M.R.Velu learned counsel for the petitioner, would submit that the cause in the present writ petition does not survive and the writ petition has rendered infructuous due to afflux of time and endorsed the same on the bundle. 2. In view of the said submission of the learned counsel, the Writ Petition is dismissed as infructuous. There shall be no order as to costs. As a sequel, miscellaneous petitions pending, if any, shall stand closed. ___________________________________ JUSTICE TARLADA RAJASEKHAR RAO Date : 17.06.2026 SJ 4 30 THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE TARLADA RAJASEKHAR RAO WRIT PETITION NO: 38600 of 2013 Date : 17.06.2026 SJ