APHC010379482025 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) [3458] TUESDAY, THE SECOND DAY OF SEPTEMBER TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SMT JUSTICE KIRANMAYEE MANDAVA WRIT PETITION NO: 19708/2025 Between: 1. VANI GRANITES, REP. BY ITS MANAGING PARTNER, Y.V.CHOUDARY, S/O. PITCHAIAH, AGED ABOUT 70 YEARS, R/O. BOWLAVADA VILLAGE, ANAKAPALJI MANDAL, VISAKHAPATNAM DISTRICT . ...PETITIONER AND 1. THE STATE OF AP, REPRESENTED BY ITS PRINCIPAL SECRETARY, INDUSTRIES AND COMMERCE DEPARTMENT SECRETARIAT BUILDINGS, VELAGAPUDI, GUNTUR DISTRICT. 2. DIRECTOR OF MINES AND GEOLOGY, GOVERNMENT OF ANDHRA PRADESH, ANJANEYA TOWERS, IBRAHIMPATNAM, VIJAYAWADA, KRISHNA DISTRICT. 3. DEPUTY DIRECTOR OF MINES AND GEOLOGY, VISAKHAPATNAM. ...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 to issue a Writ, Order or Direction, more particularly one in the nature of Writ of Mandamus declaring the action of the Respondents in not considering the appeal dt. 03-08-2016 filed by the petitioner herein against the orders passed by the 3rd respondent rejecting the quarry lease with regard to land admeasuring 1.75 hectares in Sy. No. 109 of Mamidipalem Village, Anakapalli Mandal, Visakhapatnamis wholly illegal, violative of Articles 14 and 19 of the Constitution of India and consequently declare that the Petitioner is entitled for consideration of his appeal dt. 03-08-2016 for grant of quarry lease and pass IA NO: 1 OF 2025 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 Respondents to consider the appeal dt. 03- 08-2016 filed by the petitioner herein and further direct the respondents to maintain status quo with regard to the subject land i.e., land admeasuring 1.75 hectares in Sy. No. 109 of Mamidipalem Village, Anakapalli Mandal, Visakhapatnamtill the disposal of appeal and pass Counsel for the Petitioner: 1. ADAPA RAMYA SAHITHI NAIDU Counsel for the Respondent(S): 1. GP FOR INDUSTRIES COMMERCE 2. GP FOR MINES AND GEOLOGY The Court made the following: ORDER: The grievance of petitioner in the writ petition is that the respondent authorities are not passing any order in the appeal filed by the petitioner against the orders passed by respondent No.3, rejecting the quarry lease in respect of subject land of 1.75 hectares in Sy.No.109 of Mamidipalem Village, Anakapalli Mandal, Visakhapatnam. 2. Today, when the matter is taken up for consideration, learned Senior Counsel assisted by Smt. Adapa Ramya Sahithi Naidu, learned counsel for the petitioner would submit that after filing the writ petition, the petitioner has been informed that the appeal filed by the petitioner was allowed in 2018. In view of the same, the relief sought in the writ petition would not survive. 3. Accordingly, the Writ Petition is dismissed as infructuous. The petitioner is at liberty to avail remedy as available under law. There shall be no order as to costs. As a sequel, all pending miscellaneous applications shall stand closed. ______________________________ JUSTICE KIRANMAYEE MANDAVA Date: 02.09.2025 TVN 72 THE HONOURABLE SMT JUSTICE KIRANMAYEE MANDAVA WRIT PETITION NO: 19708 of 2025 Date: 02.09.2025 TVN