APHC010146422025 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) [3332] MONDAY ,THE SEVENTH DAY OF APRIL TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE RAVI CHEEMALAPATI WRIT PETITION NO: 7670/2025 Between: Pulivarthi Srinivasa Rao and Others ...PETITIONER(S) AND The State Of Andhra Pradesh and Others ...RESPONDENT(S) Counsel for the Petitioner(S): 1. KANAKALA DEVI PRASANNAKUMAR Counsel for the Respondent(S): 1. GP FOR REGISTRATION AND STAMPS The Court made the following order: The grievance of the petitioners is that, as against certain irregularities made by the 4th respondent, they have made a representation on 15.03.2025 but so far no action has been taken by the respondent authorities by duly placing him under suspension or taking disciplinary action against him. 2. Heard Sri K.Devi Prasanna Kumar, learned counsel for the petitioners and Sri K.M.Krishna Reddy, learned Government Pleader for Stamps and Registration. 3. When the matter is taken up for consideration, learned counsel for the petitioners submitted that, the petitioners have restricted their relief and sought for a direction to dispose of the representation dated 15.03.2025 by fixing some time frame. 4. Sri K.M.Krishna Reddy, learned Government Pleader on instructions dated 28.03.2025 submitted that, the Inspector General of Registration and Stamps Department has forwarded the said representation to inquire into allegations and sought report on the same. In view of the same, as the authorities have taken steps to dispose of the petitioners representation, the writ petition can be closed and accordingly prayed to close the writ petition. 5. Learned counsel for the petitioners requested to record the above submissions and prayed to close the writ petition. 6. A perusal of the Memo No.G3/1890-2069/2025 dated 28.03.2025 indicates that the Inspector General of Registration and Stamps Department has forwarded the petitioners representation to Deputy Inspector General (R&S) for enquiry and sought report on the same. As the authority concerned has already considered the petitioners representation and taking steps in that regard, there is no purpose in keeping the writ petition pending inviting counters. As the relief sought is innocuous and no positive orders are being passed affecting the rights of the 4th respondent and further this Court is inclined to close the writ petition, ordering notice to the 4th respondent does not arise. Accordingly, the writ petition is closed. No costs. Miscellaneous applications, pending if any, shall stand closed. ________________________ JUSTICE RAVI CHEEMALAPATI BRS