APHC010380602020 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) [3233] THURSDAY,THE EIGHTEENTH DAY OF SEPTEMBER TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE B KRISHNA MOHAN WRIT PETITION NO: 25374/2020 Between: 1. RACHAPUDI NARSAMMA,, S/O.MERUMAIAH, AGED 35 YEARS, OCC- HOUSEHOLD, RIO.NIPPATLAPADU VILLAGE, CHIMAKURTHY MANDAL, PRAKASAM DISTRICT. 2. JANDRAJUPALLI SULOCHANA,, W/O.RAJESH, AGED 41 YEARS, OCC- HOUSEHOLD, RIO.NIPPATLAPADU VILLAGE. CHIMAKURTHY MANDAL, PRAKASAM DISTRICT. 3. RACHAPUDI VIJAYA KUMARI,, W/O.ISRAYALU, AGED 40 YEARS, OCC- HOUSEHOLD, RIO.NIPPATLAPADU VILLAGE, CHIMAKURTHY. MANDAL, PRAKASAM DISTRICT. 4. RACHAPUDI SANTHAMMA,, W/O. YERIMAIAH, AGED 45 YEARS, OCC- HOUSEHOLD, RIO.NIPPATLAPADU VILLAGE, CHIMAKURTHY MANDAL, PRAKASAM DISTRICT. 5. JANDRAJUPALLI LINGAMMA., W/O.PEDA VENKATESWARLU, AGED 35 YEARS, OCC- HOUSEHOLD. R/O..NIPPATLAPADU VILLAGE. CHIMAKURTHY MANDAL, PRAKASAM DISTRICT. ...PETITIONER(S) AND 1. STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH, REP. BY PRINCIPAL SECRETARY TO GOVERNMENT, REVENUE DEPARTMENT, SECRETARIAT, VELAGAPUDI, AMARAVATI, GUNTUR DISTRICT. 2. DISTRICT COLLECTOR, PRAKASAM DISTRICT AT ONGOLE. 2 HBKM,J W.P.No.25374 of 2020 3. JOINTCOLLECTOR, PRAKASAM DISTRICT AT ONGOLE. 4. REVENUE DIVISIONAL OFFICER, ONGOLE REVENUE DIVISION, ONGOLE CITY, PRAKASAM DISTRICT 5. TAHSILDAR, CHIMAKURTHY MANDAL, PRAKASAM DISTRICT. 6. VILLAGE REVENUE OFFICER, NIPPATLAPADU REVENUE VILLAGE, CHIMAKURTHY MANDAL. PRAKASAM DISTRICT.. ...RESPONDENT(S): Counsel for the Petitioner(S): 1. KOLLURI ARJUN CHOWDARY Counsel for the Respondent(S): 1. GP FOR REVENUE 3 HBKM,J W.P.No.25374 of 2020 The Court made the following Order: Heard the learned counsel for the petitioners and the learned Assistant Government Pleader for the respondents. 2. This writ petition was filed questioning the action of the respondents in deciding to grant house site pattas to the ineligible beneficiaries under the “Navaratnalu Pedalandariki Illu Scheme” in Nippatlapadu Village, Chimakurthy Mandal, Prakasam District by ignoring the petitioners and the eligible beneficiaries. 3. The learned counsel for the petitioners submits that as there was an interim order in this case and as such no pattas were granted to anybody. 4. The learned Assistant Government Pleader appearing for the 5th respondent-Tahsildar submits that the petitioners are not eligible and they have not allotted any house sites to the ineligible persons. 5. In reply, the learned counsel for the petitioners submits that no beneficiaries are given house site pattas, as already there was an interim order in this matter. 6. In view of the same, as the cause does not survive, this writ petition is disposed of as no further orders are necessary in this writ petition. Interim order if any deemed to have been vacated. There shall be no order as to costs. 4 HBKM,J W.P.No.25374 of 2020 As a sequel, Interlocutory Applications pending, if any, shall stand closed. __________________________ JUSTICE B. KRISHNA MOHAN 18.09.2025 PGT