Research › Search › Judgment

High Court of Andhra Pradesh · body

2025 DAILYLAW 21512 (AP)

Gokaraju Vishwanatha Raju, v. The State of Andhra Pradesh,

WP/18085/2022 · 2025-03-26

Gannamaneni Ramakrishna Prasad

body2025

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

1 APHC010304692022 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) [3328] WEDNESDAY ,THE TWENTY SIXTH DAY OF MARCH TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE GANNAMANENI RAMAKRISHNA PRASAD WRIT PETITION NO: 18085/2022 Between: 1. GOKARAJU VISHWANATHA RAJU,, S/O. LACHI RAJU, OCC BUSINESS, AGED ABOUT YEARS, R/ O. D. NO. 3-131, JUVVALAPALEM VILLAGE, KALLA MANDAL, WEST GODAVARI DISTRICT, AT BHEEMAVARAM ...PETITIONER AND 1. THE STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH, REP. BY ITS PRINCIPAL SECRETARY (PANCHAYAT RAJ DEPARTMENT), A.P. SECRETARIAT, VELAGAPUDI, GUNTUR DISTRICT, ANDHRA PRADESH. 2. THE DISTRICT COLLECTOR, PANCHAYATHRAJ DEPARTMENT, WEST GODAVARI DISTRICT AT BHEEMAVARAM. 3. THE DISTRICT PANCHAYAT OFFICER, , WEST GODAVARI DISTRICT AT BHEEMAVARAM 4. THE DIVISIONAL PANCHAYAT OFFICER, NARSAPURAM, 5. THE MANDAL PARISHAD DEVELOPEMENT OFFICER, KALLA MANDAL, WEST GODAVARI DISTRICT AT BHEEMAVARAM 6. THE JUVALAPALEM GRAM PANCHAYAT, REP. BY ITS SECRETARY, JUVALAPALEM. 7. P SARALA, W/O. NOT KNOWN, OCC PANCHAYAT SECRETARY, JUVVALAPALEM KALLA MANDAL, WEST GODAVARI DISTRICT. ...RESPONDENT(S): Counsel for the Petitioner: 2 1. A P REDDY Counsel for the Respondent(S): 1. KOTI REDDY IDAMAKANTI (SC FOR ZPP MPP AND GRAM PAN) 2. GP FOR PANCHAYAT RAJ RURAL DEV The Court made the following: ORAL ORDER: Heard Sri A.P. Reddy, learned Counsel for the Writ Petitioner appearing online and Sri V. Sai Kiran, learned Counsel appearing on behalf of Sri Y. Koteswara Rao, learned Standing Counsel for the Respondent Nos.5 & 6. 2. In view of the fact that W.P.No.25220 of 2022 stood withdrawn vide Order dated 26.03.2025, needless to state that the Interim Order issued in the said Writ Petition bearing W.P.No.25220 of 2022 dated 11.08.2022, shall be treated to have been vacated. In this view of the matter, no cause of action would survive in the present Writ Petition, inasmuch as the Official Respondents are now free to proceed in accordance with law. 3. The Writ Petition is disposed of. No order as to costs. 4. Interlocutory Applications, if any, stand closed in terms of this order. ______________________________________ GANNAMANENI RAMAKRISHNA PRASAD, J Dt: 26.03.2025 Vns