1 APHC010269712020 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) [3396] THURSDAY, THE TWENTY EIGHTH DAY OF AUGUST TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE PRESENT THE HONOURABLE DR JUSTICE VENKATA JYOTHIRMAI PRATAPA WRIT PETITION NO: 17785/2020 Between: 1. JUTTIGA MADHULATHA, W/O LATE VENKATESWARA RAO, D/O SATYANARAYANA, AGE 40 YEARS, OCC. PRIVATE SERVICE, R/O H NO.3-103-1, KATTA VARI MERAKA, LAKSHMANESWARAM VILLAGE, NARASAPURAM MANDAL, WEST GODAVARI DISTRICT. ...PETITIONER AND 1. THE STATE OF AP, REP. BY ITS PRINCIPAL SECRETARY, HOME DEPARTMENT, SECRETARIAT BUILDINGS, VELAGAPUDI, ARNARAVATHI. 2. THE DIVISIONAL POLICE, OFFICER - CUM SUPERINTENDENT OF POLICE, WEST GODAVARI DISTRICT AT ELURU. 3. THE SUBDIVISIONAL POLICE OFFICERCUMDEPUTY SUPERINTENDENT OF POLICE NARSAPURAM SUBDIVISION, NARSAPURAM, WEST GODAVARI DISTRICT. 4. THE STATION HOUSE OFFICER, PALAKOL TOWN PS., PALAKOL, WEST GODAVARI DISTRICT. ...RESPONDENT(S): Counsel for the Petitioner: 1. K V L NARASIMHA RAO Counsel for the Respondent(S): 1. GP FOR HOME The Court made the following: ORDER: This Writ Petition is filed under Article 226 of Constitution of India with the following prayer for: “.... a an appropriate Writ Order or direction more particularly one in the nature of Writ of Mandamus declaring the action of the respondents 2 and 3 in not initiating appropriate action against the 4th respondent who pressurising the petitioner to settle the matter with 3rd parties and interfering into the civil dispute instead of taking appropriate action on the petitioners complaint vide receipt No 71/2020 as illegal arbitrary contrary to law violation of principles of natural justice and consequently 2 direct the respondents 2 and 3 to take appropriate action against the 4th respondent to act upon the petitioners complaint dated 13.08.2020 directing the 4th respondent not to interfere into the civil dispute and private settlements instead of initiating appropriate action on the complaint vide receipt No 71/2020 lodged by the petitioner” 2. Today, when the matter came up for hearing, learned counsel for the petitioner submits that nothing survives for adjudication in the Writ Petition and the matter has become infructuous. 3. Recording the said submission, the Writ Petition is dismissed as infructuous. There shall be no order as to costs. As a sequel thereto, miscellaneous petitions, if any, pending shall stand closed. __________________________________ Dr.VENKATA JYOTHIRMAI PRATAPA, J Date: 28.08.2025 Asr 3 THE HONOURABLE DR JUSTICE VENKATA JYOTHIRMAI PRATAPA W.P.No.17785 of 2020 Dt.28.08.2025 Asr