APHC010697532013 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) [3457] TUESDAY,THE SIXTEENTH DAY OF JUNE TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY SIX PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE HARINATH.N WRIT PETITION NO: 28142/2013 Between: 1. GADU CHINNI KUMARI LAKSHMI, W/O. APPALA NAIDU, AGE 37 YEARS, OCC: HOUSE WIFE, FORMER CHAIR PERSON OF BHEEMUNIPATNAM MUNICIPALITY, R/O. GADU STREET, BHEEMUNIPATNAM, VISAKHAPATNAM DISTRICT. ...PETITIONER AND 1. THE GOVERNMENT OF ANDHRA PRADESH, REP. BY ITS PRINCIPAL SECRETARY, MUNICIPAL ADMINISTRATION AND URBAN DEVELOPMENT, SECRETARIAT, HYDERABAD. 2. THE COMMISSIONER DIRECTOR, MUNICIPAL ADMINISTRATION AND URBAN DEVELOPMENT, GOVERNMENT OF A.P., HYDERABAD. 3. THE GREATER VISAKHAPATNAM MUNICIPAL CORPORATION, REP. BY ITS COMMISSIONER, VISAKHAPATNAM. ...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 to issue a writ, order or direction more particularly one in the nature of Writ Mandamus or any other appropriate and declare G.O.Ms.No.374, Municipal Administration and Urban Development (Elec.-II) Department, dated 30-07-2013 as illegal, and unconstitutional for being violation of the Constitution (Seventy-fourth Amendment) Act, 1992 with particular reference 2 to Article 243-ZF, 243-R of Constitution of India, consequently set aside the G.O.Ms.No.375, Municipal Administration and Urban Development (Elec.-II) Department, dated 30-07-2013, IA NO: 1 OF 2013(WPMP 34933 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 stay the operation of G.O.Ms.No.374, Municipal Administration and Urban Development (Elec.-II) Department, dated 30-07-2013 Counsel for the Petitioner: 1. B SESIBUSHAN RAO Counsel for the Respondent(S): 1. GP FOR MUNCIPAL ADMN AND URBAN DEV The Court made the following: 3 Order:- There is no representation for the petitioner today. 2. The learned Standing Counsel appearing for the 3rd respondent submits that the cause in the writ petition would not survive any further, as the petitioner is challenging the issuance of G.O.Ms.No.374, dated 30.07.2013, whereby the Government of Andhra Pradesh had abolished Bheemunipatnam Municipality, Visakhapatnam District, as the area was covered by and merged with the Greater Visakhapatnam Municipal Corporation. 3. The writ petition has outlived its purpose and is accordingly dismissed as infructuous. 4. Accordingly, this 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 HARINATH.N 16.06.2026 PNS