APHC010747932014 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) [3333] FRIDAY ,THE TWENTY FOURTH DAY OF JANUARY TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SMT JUSTICE V.SUJATHA WRIT PETITION NO: 17449/2014 Between: T.annapurna and Others ...PETITIONER(S) AND State Of Andhra Pradesh and Others ...RESPONDENT(S) Counsel for the Petitioner(S): 1. J PRABHAKAR Counsel for the Respondent(S): 1. 2. V SURYA KIRAN KUMAR (SC FOR VMRDA and MUDA) 3. GP FOR REVENUE 4. GP FOR MUNCIPAL ADMN AND URBAN DEV The Court made the following: ORDER: The present Writ Petition came to be filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India seeking the following relief:- “…to issue appropriate Writ, Order or Direction particularly, a Writ of Mandamus declaring the proposed action on the part of the Respondents in seeking to cancel the sale deeds/allotments relating to all that piece of land situated in Plot No.22 in LP No.16/2011 measuring 600 sq. yards covered by Survey No.370/2P of Madhurawada village of Visakhapatnam Rural Mandal, within the limits of Greater Visakhapatnam Municipal Corporation as illegal, arbitrary, without jurisdiction, contrary to the provisions of Andhra Pradesh Urban Areas (Development) Act, 1975, Article-300A, 14 and 21 of the Constitution of India and consequently set aside the same…” 2. The action of the respondents in seeking to cancel the sale deeds/allotments relating to the piece of land situated in plot No.22 in LP.NO.16/2011 measuring 600 square yards covered by Sy.No.370/2P of Madhurawada village of Visakhapatnam Rural Mandal, within the limits of Greater Visakhapatnam Municipal Corporation is under challenge in the present writ petition. 3. Heard learned counsel for the petitioners, learned Government Pleader for Municipal Administration and Urban Development and Sri. V. Surya Kiran Kumar, learned Standing Counsel for Municipal Administration and Urban Development. 4. Today when the writ petition came up for hearing, learned Standing Counsel representing the 2nd respondent has informed this Court that in pursuance of the show cause notice dated 23.09.2013 which is challenged in the present writ petition, the 3rd respondent has already passed final orders on 03.07.2014 which was also acknowledged by the petitioners on 11.07.2014. Learned Standing Counsel further submitted that the petitioners, without even challenging the show cause notice dated 23.09.2013 has filed the present writ petition. 5. It can be seen that subsequent to issuance of the notice dated 23.09.2013, the 3rd respondent has already passed final orders on 03.07.2014 and the same was also acknowledged by the petitioners on 11.07.2014. As such, this Court is of the opinion that the cause in the writ petition would not survive for further adjudication. However, the petitioners are at liberty to challenge the final order passed by the 3rd respondent on 03.07.2014. 6. Accordingly, this writ petition is dismissed as infructuous. There shall be no order as to costs. As a sequel thereto, miscellaneous petitions, if any, shall stand closed. ________________________ JUSTICE V.SUJATHA Date:24.01.2025 Gss