APHC010310182019 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) [3459] MONDAY,THE SIXTH DAY OF APRIL TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY SIX PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SMT JUSTICE SUMATHI JAGADAM WRIT PETITION NO: 14673/2019 Between: 1. CHUKKA VENKATA RAMANA REDDY,, S/O NARAYANA REDDY, AGED ABOUT 58 YEARS, R/O RATNAYAMMAPETA VILLAGE, PAYAKARAOPETA MANDAL, VISAKHAPATNAM DISTRICT. 2. CHUKKA BHARGAVA,, S/O VENKATA RAMANA REDDY, AGED ABOUT 30 YEARS, R/O RATNAYAMMAPETA VILLAGE, PAYAKARAOPETA MANDAL, VISAKHAPATNAM DISTRICT ...PETITIONER(S) AND 1. THE STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH, REVENUE DEPARTMENT, REPRESENTED BY ITS PRINCIPAL SECRETARY, SECRETARIAT, VELAGAPUDI, AMARAVATHI, GUNTUR DISTRICT. 2. THE TAHSILDAR, PAYAKARAOPETA MANDAL, VISAKHAPATNAM DISTRICT. 3. THE KUMARAPURAM GRAM PANCHAYAT, PAYAKARAOPETA MANDAL, VISAKHAPATNAM DISTRICT, REP. BY ITS SECRETARY. 4. THE SUBINSPECTOR OF POLICE, PAYAKARAOPETA, VISAKHAPATNAM DISTRICT. ...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 an appropriate writ, order or direction more particularly one 2 in the nature of Writ of Mandamus declaring the highhanded action of the 2 and 4th respondents in interfering with the residential building construction activity undertaken by the petitioners in Sy.No.240 admeasuring to an extent of Ac.0.08 cents each situated at Ratnayammapeta Village, Payakaraopeta Mandal, Visakhapatnam District, without notice, without following the procedure as contemplated under law is illegal, arbitrary and colourable exercise of the power vested with them and also in violation of Articles 14, 19 (1) (e) and 21 of the Constitution of India and pass IA NO: 1 OF 2019 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 direct the 2nd and 4th respondent in not to interfere with the construction activity of the petitioners' undertaken in Sy.No.240 admeasuring to an extent of Ac.0.08 cents each situated at Ratnayammapeta Village, Payakaraopeta Mandal, Visakhapatnam District, except under due process of law pending disposal of the writ petition and pass Counsel for the Petitioner(S): 1. V V N NARAYANA RAO Counsel for the Respondent(S): 1. GP FOR REVENUE (AP) 3 The Court made the following ORDER: Sri.D.Prasad Kumar, learned counsel representing learned counsel for the petitioners submits that the cause in the writ petition does not survive for adjudication. Since the cause in the Writ Petition does not survive for adjudication, the Writ Petition is dismissed as infructuous. No order as to costs. As a sequel, miscellaneous applications pending, if any, shall stand closed. __________________________ JUSTICE SUMATHI JAGADAM Date: 06.04.2026 rsd 4 5 THE HONOURABLE SMT JUSTICE SUMATHI JAGADAM WRIT PETITION NO: 14673/2019 Date: 06.04.2026 rsd