1 APHC010663582010 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) [3328] WEDNESDAY,THE TENTH DAY OF DECEMBER TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE GANNAMANENI RAMAKRISHNA PRASAD WRIT PETITION NO: 17327/2010 Between: 1. M/S. SRI DURGA CASHEW PROCESSING UNIT, A PARTNERSHIP FIRM, REP. BY ITS MANAGING PARTNER, P. SRINIVAS, S/O.SATYANARAYANA BUSINESS R/O. 3-467, RAMAKRISHNA NAGAR, NEAR BALAGIPETA, RAJAHMUNDRY, E.G.DISTRICT ...PETITIONER AND 1. THE A.P. INDUSTRIAL INFRASTRUCTURE CORPORATION LTD A, GOVERNMENT OF ANDHRA PRADESH UNDERTAKING ) REP. BY ITS MANAGING DIRECTOR, PARISRAMABHAVAN, 6TH FLOOR, 5-9- 58/B, FATEHMAIDAN ROAD, HYDERABAD - 4 2. A.P.INDUSTRIAL INFRASTRUCTURE CORPORATION LTD, KAKINADA, REP. BY ITS ZONAL MANAGER 3. THE DISTRICT COLLECTOR, EAST GODAVARI DISTRICT, KAKINDA 4. THE DISTRICT INDUSTRIAL CENTRE, PITHAPURAM ROAD, RAMAYYAPETA, KAKINADA, REP. BY ITS GENERAL MANAGER 5. M/S. R.P. WATER TUBES A PROPRIETARY CONCERN, REP. BYU ITS PROPRIETARY SMT. M. RATNA PRABHA, D/NO. 4-444/3, NAVABHARAT NAGAR, ROAD NO. 2, BOMMURU, RAJAHMUNDRY E.G.DISTRICT ...RESPONDENT(S): Counsel for the Petitioner: 1. ELEVATED AS JUDGE Counsel for the Respondent(S): 2 GP FOR INDUSTRIES COMMERCE The Court made the following: ORAL ORDER: No representation on behalf of the Writ Petitioner. 2. Ms. Linga Bhargava Lakshmi, learned Counsel representing Sri Rama Chandra Rao Gurram, learned Counsel for the Respondent Nos.1 & 2 is present. 3. The prayer in the main Writ Petition is a challenge against the action of the Official Respondents in provisionally allotting Shed No.12, Industrial Park, adjacent to National Highway No.5, Dowlaiswaram, East Godavari District to Respondent No.5 without considering the Application of the Writ Petitioner dated 02.03.2010. 4. It is noted that the Interim Order passed on 28.07.2010 in W.P.M.P.No.21833 of 2010 was vacated by this Court on 09.02.2011 in W.V.M.P.No.4514 of 2010. 5. This Court, having taken note of the continuous absence of the Writ Petitioner on the last two occasions, is not inclined to adjourned the matter since this Writ Petition is of the year 2010 and that the Interim Order stood vacated on 09.02.2011. 6. Since none appeared for the Writ Petitioner on the last occasion as well as today and also having considered the prayer in the Writ Petition, this Court is of the opinion that the cause of action does not survive. 7. Accordingly, this Writ Petition is dismissed for non-prosecution. No order as to costs. 8. Interlocutory Applications, if any, stand closed in terms of this order. ______________________________________ GANNAMANENI RAMAKRISHNA PRASAD, J Dt: 10.12.2025 Vns