APHC010341902020 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) [3396] MONDAY, THE FIFTEENTH DAY OF SEPTEMBER TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE PRESENT THE HONOURABLE DR. JUSTICE VENKATA JYOTHIRMAI PRATAPA WRIT PETITION NO: 22691/2020 Between: MR. PATURI SRINIVASA RAO, S/O LATE JAGAN MOHAN RAO OCC. BUSINESS, R/O PLOT NO - 123, G -2, GEETHIKA RESIDENCY, NEAR SATYA SAI NIGAMAGAMAM, SRINAGAR COLONY, HYDERABAD - 73 ...PETITIONER AND 1. THE STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH, REPRESENTED BY ITS PRINCIPAL SECRETARY HOME DEPARTMENT, SECRETARIAT BUILDING, NELAPADU, AMARAVATI. 2. THE MANDAL EXECUTIVE MAGISTRATE/TAHSILDAR, NANDIGAMA MANDAL, KRISHNA DISTRICT. ANDHRA PRADESH 3. THE SHO, NANDIGAMA PS NANDIGAMA, ANDHRA PRADESH 4. NELAKUDITI KASI VISWESWARA RAO, S/O TIRUPATHAIAH AGED 48 YEARS, OCC. BUSINESS, R/O NO.6-62, RAITHUPETA, NANDIGAMA, KRISHNA DISTRICT. 5. NELAKUDITI TIRUPATHAIAH, S/O (LATE) KASAIAH AGED ABOUT 69 YEARS OCC. BUSINESS R/O NO.6-62, RAITHUPETA, NANDIGAMA, KRISHNA DISTRICT. 6. NELAKUDITI SULOCHANA DEVI, W/O LATE NAGESHWAR RAO AGED ABOUT 55 YEARS OCC. HOUSE WIFE, R/O 6-61, RAITHUPETA, NANDIGAMA, KRISHNA DISTRICT. 7. NELAKUDITI HARI KRISHNA, S/O LATE NAGESHWAR RAO AGED ABOUT 31 YEARS OCC. HOUSE WIFE, R/O 6-61, RAITHUPETA, NANDIGAMA, KRISHNA DISTRICT. ...RESPONDENT(S): Counsel for the Petitioner: 1. P BADRINATH Counsel for the Respondent(S): 1. RAMA RAO KOCHIRI The Court made the following: 2 ORDER: This Writ Petition is filed under Article 226 of Constitution of India with the following prayer for: “.... a Writ of Mandamus, declaring the action of 2nd Respondent in issuing proceedings in MC.No. 69/2020 dated 23-11-2020, thereby seeking to dispossess the petitioner from the subject property i.e., Sri Sai Bhargava Cold Storage Pvt. Ltd at Sy.No. 28/1, Ambarupeta village, Nandigama Mandal, Krishna District as illegal, arbitrary, unconstitutional, contrary to Section 145 (1) of the Code of Criminal Procedure besides violating the fundamental rights of the petitioner guaranteed under Article 19(1) (g) of the Constitution of India and consequently set aside the same.” 2. When the matter is taken up for hearing, Sri P.Badrinath, learned counsel for the Petitioner would submit that no further orders are required in this matter as the relief sought in this petition has become infructuous. 3. Sri V.Farooq, learned Assistant Government Pleader for Home, would submit that Court may pass appropriate orders. 4. Considering the submissions made, the Writ Petition is dismissed as the relief has become infructuous. There shall be no order as to costs. As a sequel thereto, miscellaneous petitions, if any, pending shall stand closed. ________________________________________ Dr.JUSTICE VENKATA JYOTHIRMAI PRATAPA Date:15.09.2025 Dinesh 3 HON’BLE DR. JUSTICE VENKATA JYOTHIRMAI PRATAPA W.P.No.22691 of 2020 Dt.15.09.2025 Dinesh