APHC010502132016 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) [3310] THURSDAY ,THE TWENTIETH DAY OF FEBRUARY TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE PRESENT THE HONOURABLE DR JUSTICE K MANMADHA RAO WRIT PETITION NO: 18335/2016 Between: Gudiseva Nagendram and Others ...PETITIONER(S) AND The Commissioner Endowments Department and Others ...RESPONDENT(S) Counsel for the Petitioner(S): 1. V V PRABHAKARA RAO Counsel for the Respondent(S): 1. GP FOR ENDOWMENTS (AP) 2. ELEVATED AS JUDGE The Court made the following: ORDER:- The Writ Petition is filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, seeking the following relief: “…..to issue a Writ of mandamus or any other appropriate order or direction declaring the proposed auction dated 13.06.2016 to be conducted by the 2nd respondent is highly arbitrary, illegal and violation of principles of natural justice and also in violation of Articles 14 and 300(A) of the Constitution of India and also in violation of the Orders of this Hon’ble Court dated 17.06.2013 in W.P.M.P.No.20581 of 2013 in W.P.No.16972 of 2013 and consequently set aside the proposed auction by the 2nd respondent, dated 13.06.2016 in the premises of Andhra Jateeya Vidya Parishat, Machilipatnam, Krishna District and to pass ….”. 2 ] 2. No representation for the petitioners. 3. Heard learned Government Pleader for Endowments appearing for the respondents. 4. Perused the record. 5. On 10.06.2016, this Court while issuing notice before admission, granted interim direction that the auction may go on but should not be finalized for a period of two (02) weeks. In the meantime, learned Standing Counsel should get the instructions and file counter categorically stating that as to whether there was any understanding between the petitioners and the respondent authorities as claimed by the petitioners in the letter, dated 20.08.2013 for extension of the lease for a period of five (05) years. 6. Respondent No.2 filed counter affidavit, wherein it is stated that the respondent had never given any assurance or asked the petitioners to give any undertaking. The rent demanded from the petitioners in cash basing on the prevailing of the market rate of one bag of paddy and not the enhanced rent. As and when the rate of the bag of paddy is increased in the market by increased rental by collecting from the petitioners and not the 50% enhanced rents. It is further stated that the auction was held on 13.06.2016, total 20 members have signed auction conditions, 7 persons paid the auction deposit of Rs.15,000/-, 6 persons participated in the auction and the petitioner No.1 has became the highest bidder for entire extent of Ac.12.68 cents in Sy.No.387/1 for an amount of Rs.18,400/- for Acre per annum, as such the writ petition has become infructuous as the petitioner No.1 and other 3 petitioners are severally and combinedly cultivating the land and accordingly the writ petition is liable to be dismissed. 7. 7. On hearing the submissions of the learned Assistant Government Pleader, as the petitioner No.1 has become the highest bidder, no cause survives in the Writ Petition at present and it may be closed. 8. Recording the above submission, this Writ Petition is closed. There shall be no order as to costs. As a sequel, miscellaneous applications pending, if any, shall stand closed. __________________________ Dr. K. MANMADHA RAO, J Dated: 20.02.2025 SCS 4 196 THE HON’BLE DR. JUSTICE K. MANMADHA RAO W.P.No.18335 of 2016 Date : 20.02.2025 SCS