1 APHC010550902014 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) [3328] WEDNESDAY,THE THIRD DAY OF SEPTEMBER TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE GANNAMANENI RAMAKRISHNA PRASAD WRIT PETITION NO: 15581 OF 2014 Between: 1.PRAGADA MALLU DORA, E.G.DIST., OCC: AGRICULTURE, R/O. SRUNGAVRUKSHAM VILLAGE, THONDANGI MANDAL, EAST GODAVARI DISTRICT. ...PETITIONER AND 1.APEPDCL E G DIST 5 OTRS, APEPDCL, JAGGAMPETA, EAST GODAVARI DISTRICT. 2.THE ASSISTANT DIVISIONAL ENGINEER OPERATIONS, APEPDCL, TUNI, EAST GODAVARI DISTRICT. 3.THE ASSISTANT ENGINEER OPERATIONS, APEPDCL, ANNAVARAM, EAST GODAVARI DISTRICT. 4.THE TAHSILDAR THONDANGI MANDAL EAST GODAVARI DISTRICT, - 5.SMT PRAGADA MANGAYAMMA W/O CHITAAYA, OCC: HOUSE HOLD, SRUNGAVRUKSHAM VILLAGE, THONDANGI MANDAL, EAST GODAVARI DISTRICT 6.SMT PRAGADA RAMA LAXMI W/O KAM BABU, OCC: HOUSE HOLD, SRUNGAVRUKSHAM VILLAGE, THONDANGI MANDAL, EAST GODAVARI DISTRICT. ...RESPONDENT(S): 2 Counsel for the Petitioner: 1.S JAGADISH Counsel for the Respondent(S): 1.V V N NARAYANA RAO 2.GP FOR REVENUE 3.V V SATISH (SC for APEPDCL) 4.P ANAND SESHU (SC FOR APEPDCL) The Court made the following ORAL ORDER: None for the Writ Petitioner. 2. Heard Ms. Aiswarya Chowdary, Ld. Counsel appearing on behalf of Sri V.V.Satish, Ld. Standing Counsel for the APEPDCL. 3. The prayer sought in the present Writ Petition is as under: “In view of the facts and circumstances stated above, I pray that this Hon’ble Court may be pleased to issue a Writ, Order or direction more in the nature of Writ of Mandamus by declaring the action of the 1st respondent in sanctioning permission for digging agriculture bore wells in favour of the 6th respondent in Sy.No.302/2, Srungavruksham Village, Thondangi Mandal, East Godavari District as void, illegal, arbitrary, contrary to Section 10 and Rules 13 and 14 of A.P. Water, Land and Trees Act and Rules and set aside the sanction order bearing No.JAG-SDR 508/2013-14 dated 19.11.2013 of the 1st respondent by holding the same as void, illegal, contrary to A.P. Water, Land and Trees Act and Rules and pass such other and further orders as this Hon’ble Court may deem fit and proper in the circumstances of the case”. 4. The above prayer would indicate that the Writ Petitioner is challenging the bore well that is dug by the Respondent Nos. 5 and 6. 5. It transpires from the record that Sri V.V.Narayana Rao, Ld. Counsel for the Unofficial Respondent Nos. 5 and 6 has filed Counter- Affidavit along with an Application for vacating stay that was granted by this 3 Court in W.P.M.P. No. 19303 of 2014. The contents of the Counter-Affidavit would indicate that the 5th Respondent has in fact obtained permission from the Respondent Authorities for digging of bore well which stood cancelled subsequently by the Respondent No.4. It is also stated in Para-4 of the Counter-Affidavit that the Respondent No.5 has obtained permission from the Respondent No.4 for digging bore well and that there is no bore well dug by the Respondents within the radius of 250 meters and therefore, the averments in the Writ Petition are false. 6. There is no appearance either by the Writ Petitioners or by the Unofficial Respondents. 7. Since this Writ Petition is of the year 2014, this Court is now proceeding on the strength of the pleadings, as noted above. Due to long lapse of time, this Court is of the opinion that the cause of action does not survive. 8. Accordingly, this Writ Petition is disposed of as having become infructuous. No order as to costs. 9. Interlocutory Applications, if any, stand closed in terms of this order. _________________________________ GANNAMANENIRAMAKRISHNA PRASAD, J Dt: 03.09.2025 Mnr 87 4 HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE GANNAMANENI RAMAKRISHNA PRASAD WRIT PETITION NO: 15581 OF 2014 Dt: 03.09.2025 Mnr