APHC010291952021 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) [3396] TUESDAY,THE FOURTEENTH DAY OF OCTOBER TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE PRESENT THE HONOURABLE DR JUSTICE VENKATA JYOTHIRMAI PRATAPA WRIT PETITION NO: 17171/2021 Between: 1. R.V. SATYANARAYANA, S/O.BANGARAYYA, HINDU, AGED ABOUT 62 YEARS, CULTIVATION, R/O. RACHAPALLI VILLAGE, MAKAVARAPALEM MANDAL, VISAKHAPATNAM DISTRICT. ...PETITIONER AND 1. THE GOVERNMENT OF A P, REP. BY ITS PRINCIPAL SECRETARY, HOME DEPARTMENT, VELAGAPUDI SECRETARIAT, VELAGAPUDI, GUNTUR DISTRICT. 2. THE STATION HOUSE OFFICER, MAKAVARAPALEM POLICE STATION, MAKAVARAPALEM MANDAL, VISAKHAPATNAM DISTRICT. 3. M/S ANRAK ALUMINIUM LIMITED, REP.BY ITS CHAIRMAN MANAGING DIRECTOR, OFFICE AT APIIC INDUSTRIAL PARK, G KODURU VILLAGE, MAKAVARAPALEM MANDAL, VISAKHAPATNAM DISTRICT. ...RESPONDENT(S): Petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed therewith, the High Court may be pleased to issue a Writ, Order or Direction, particularly a Writ of Mandamus, declaring the action of the 2nd respondent and subordinates of 3rd respondent in interfering with our peaceful possession and enjoyment of the property of an extent of Ac.30.00 cents in Sy.No.78P and adjacent gap area (Northern side) of Tamaram Village, Makavarapalem Mandal, Visakhapatnam District and its as illegal, arbitrary, unconstitutional and contrary to Article 300-A of the Constitution of India and to pass such IA NO: 1 OF 2021 Petition under Section 151 CPC praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed in support of the petition, the High Court may be pleased be pleased to direct the 2nd respondent and Subordinates of the 3rd respondent not to interfere with our peaceful possession and enjoyment of the property of an extent of Ac.30.00 cents in Sy.No.78P and 2 adjacent gap area (Northern side) of Tamaram Village, Makavarapalem Mandal, Visakhapatnam District, pending disposal of the above writ petition and to pass such other Counsel for the Petitioner: 1. K SAIRAM MURTHY Counsel for the Respondent(S): 1. GP FOR HOME 3 The Court made the following: ORDER: The earlier Docket Proceedings would show that none represented for the Petitioner. Today, when the matter is called, none represented for the Petitioner. Learned Assistant Government Pleader for Home is in attendance. In that view, this Writ Petition is dismissed for non-prosecution. No order as to costs. Pending applications, if any, shall stand closed. DR.JUSTICE VENKATA JYOTHIRMAI PRATAPA Mjl/* 4 HON’BLE DR. JUSTICE VENKATA JYOTHIRMAI PRATAPA Writ Petition No. 17171 of 2021 14.10.2025 Mjl /*