APHC010017402022 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH (Special Original Jurisdiction) THURSDAY, THE TWENTY THIRD DAY OF JANUARY TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE RAVI CHEEMALAPATI WRIT PETITION NO: Between: Smt Sunnapuralla Rangamma, and others AND The State of Andhra Pradesh and others Counsel for the Petitioner(S): 1. M KARIBASAIAH Counsel for the Respondent(S): 1. GP FOR HOME 2. GP FOR REVENUE 3. N RANGA REDDY The Court made the following order: The short grievance of the petitioners is that without following the due process of law, respondent Nos.4 and 5 are proposing to carry out survey in their land to an extent of Ac.08.00 cents situated in survey No.30-1 of Mangalamalaka village, Mudigubba District. IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) THURSDAY, THE TWENTY THIRD DAY OF JANUARY TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE RAVI CHEEMALAPATI WRIT PETITION NO: 1321/2022 amma, and others ...PETITIONER(S) The State of Andhra Pradesh and others ...RESPONDENT(S) Counsel for the Petitioner(S): Counsel for the Respondent(S): The Court made the following order: The short grievance of the petitioners is that without following the due process of law, respondent Nos.4 and 5 are proposing to carry out an extent of Ac.08.00 cents situated in survey 1 of Mangalamalaka village, Mudigubba Mandal, Ananthapur IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH [3332] THURSDAY, THE TWENTY THIRD DAY OF JANUARY THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE RAVI CHEEMALAPATI ...PETITIONER(S) ...RESPONDENT(S) The short grievance of the petitioners is that without following the due process of law, respondent Nos.4 and 5 are proposing to carry out an extent of Ac.08.00 cents situated in survey Mandal, Ananthapur 2. Heard Sri M.Kari Basaiah, learned counsel for the petitioners and Sri Krishna Praneeth, learned Assistant Government Pleader for Revenue appearing for the respondents. 3. Learned counsel for the petitioners in elaboration to what has been stated in the affidavit contended that respondent Nos.7 to 10, who have no right over the petitioners’ land, are trying to encroach the land and also trying to enter with factious record with the support of respondent No.4. He further submitted that in support of the false claim of respondent Nos.7 to 10, respondent Nos.4 and 5 are trying to carry out survey in petitioners’ land to alienate the same in favour of respondent Nos.7 to 10. As such, prayed to pass appropriate orders protecting the interest of the petitioners. 3. On the other hand, learned Assistant Government Pleader while reiterating the contents of the counter submitted that respondent Nos.4 and 5 have never involved in surveying the petitioners’ land or never tried to tamper the records of the petitioners land in favour of respondent Nos.7 to 10. As such, there is nothing remains for adjudication and prayed to close the Writ Petition. 4. Perusal of the counter would indicate that respondent Nos.4 and 5 have never involved in surveying the petitioners’ land and never tried to alienate the subject land in favour of respondent Nos.7 to 10. 5. In view of the above and taking the submissions of both the learned counsel into consideration, as the respondent authorities have never involved in surveying the petitioner’s land, there remains nothing for adjudication and the Writ Petition is liable to be closed. 6. Accordingly, the Writ Petition is closed. There shall be no order as to costs. As a sequel thereto, interlocutory applications pending, if any in the Writ Petition, shall also stand closed. _________________________________ JUSTICE RAVI CHEEMALAPATI 23.01.2025 MP 193 THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE RAVI CHEEMALAPATI WRIT PETITION NO: 1321 of 2022 23.01.2025 MP