APHC010134572020 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: 8011/2020 Between: 1. P. PUSHPAVATHI, W/O LATE BYRAGI, HINDU, AGED ABOUT 73 YEARS, HOUSE-WIFE, R/O. 14/49-A, RAILUPET, GUDIVADA, KRISHNA DISTRICT. 2. KUNAPAREDDY RENU, , W/O VEERA RAMBABU, HINDU, AGED ABOUT 58 YEARS, HOUSE-WIFE, R/O. 2-17, MAIN ROAD, BANTUMILLI, KRISHNA DISTRICT. 3. KOTHARI NANCHARAIAH,, S/O RAJA RAO, HINDU, AGED ABOUT 60 YEARS, CULTIVATION, R/O. MALLESWARA COLONY, KAPPLADODDI VILLAGE, GUDURU MANDAL, KRISHNA DISTRICT. 4. SIMHADRI ATCHARA RAO,, S/O LATE HANUMANTHA RAO, HINDU, AGED ABOUT 65 YEARS, CULTIVATION, R/O. BOMMINAMPADU VILLAGE, MUDINEPALLI MANDAL, KRISHNA DISTRICT. ...PETITIONER(S) AND 1. THE STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH, BY ITS PRINCIPAL SECRETARY, REVENUE DEPARTMENT, VELAGAPUDI, AMARAVATHI, GUNTUR DISTRICT. 2. THE DISTRICT COLLECTOR, COLLECTORATE CAMPUS, MACHILIPATNAM, KRISHNA DISTRICT. 3. THE REVENUE DIVISIONAL OFFICER, COLLECTORATE CAMPUS, MACHILIPATNAM, KRISHNA DISTRICT. 2 4. THE TAHSILDAR, GUDURU MANDAL, GUDURU, KRISHNA DISTRICT. ...RESPONDENT(S): Counsel for the Petitioner(S): 1. NARASIMHA RAO GUDISEVA Counsel for the Respondent(S): 1. GP FOR REVENUE (AP) The Court made the following: 3 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, things and deeds of the respondents in converting the Punta, Canal, and Village Tank, popularly called Gollavani Cheruvu, situated in R.S. Nos.164-1, 160-1, 164-2, 160-2A, and 160-2B, to extents of Ac.0.56, 2.51, 2.44, and 0.43 cents respectively, of Kappladoddi Village, Guduru Mandal, Krishna District, for the purpose of laying housing plots under the Navaratnalu – Pedalandariki Illu scheme. 3. On the other hand, the learned Assistant Government Pleader, relying upon the counter of the 4th respondent, submits that the subject land is not used for the above said public purpose. 4. In view of the same, no further orders are necessary in this writ petition. 5. Accordingly, this writ petition is disposed of. However, it is made clear that the respondent Nos.2 to 4 shall deal with the subject land strictly in accordance with law, if so warranted, for any public purpose. Interim orders, if any, stand vacated. There shall be no order as to costs. As a sequel, Miscellaneous Petitions pending, if any, shall stand closed. _________________________ JUSTICE B KRISHNA MOHAN 18.09.2025 PNS 4