Research › Search › Judgment

High Court of Andhra Pradesh · body

2025 DAILYLAW 5745 (AP)

Ravula Chandra Sekhar v. The State of Andhra Pradesh

WP/3264/2020 · 2025-08-31

Venkata Jyothirmai Pratapa

body2025

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

1 APHC010049862020 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) [3396] MONDAY, THE FIRST DAY OF SEPTEMBER TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE PRESENT THE HONOURABLE DR JUSTICE VENKATA JYOTHIRMAI PRATAPA WRIT PETITION NO: 3264/2020 Between: 1. RAVULA CHANDRA SEKHAR, S/O VARALU, AGE ABOUT 41 YEARS, OCC. BUSINESS, R/O FLAT NO.13, SAI APARTMENTS, 6TH LANE, 18TH CROSS, BRODIPET, GUNTUR. ...PETITIONER AND 1. THE STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH, , REP. BY ITS PRINCIPAL SECRETARY, HOME DEPARTMENT, SECRETARIAT, HYDERABAD. 2. THE SUPERINTENDENT OF POLICE, GUNTUR URBAN DISTRICT, GUNTUR, GUNTUR DISTRICT. 3. THE STATION HOUSE OFFICER, , NAGARAMPALEM POLICE STATION, GUNTUR, GUNTUR DISTRICT. 4. THE GUNTUR MUNICIPAL CORPORATION, , REP. BY ITS COMMISSIONER, GUNTUR, GUNTUR DISTRICT. 5. AMERICAN BAPTIST FOREIGN MISSION SOCIETY, REP. BY ITS GUNTUR PROPERTIES CUSTODIAN YENUBARI JAYACHANDRA PAUL S/O CHINA GEORGE, AGE ABOUT 70 YBARS, R/O D.NO.25- 16-99A, G.T.ROAD, NEAR MEDICAL CLUB, LAKSHMINARAYANAPURAM, GUNTUR. 6. SRI R VIJAY PAUL, S/O NOT KNOWN TO THE PETITIONER, AGE MAJOR, OCC. RETIRED DSP IN CID.,R/O KANNAVARITHOTA, 2NDLANE, GUNTUR. 7. SRI T NATHANEIL, S/O NOT KNOWN TO THE PETITIONER, AGE MAJOR, R/O 4TH LINE, KANNAVARITHOTA, GUNTUR. 8. SRI N MOHANRAO, S/O NOT KNOWN TO THE PETITIONER, AGE MAJOR, R/O 1ST LINE, KANNAVARITHOTA, GUNTUR. 9. SRI N NANA RAO, S/O NOT KNOWN TO THE PETITIONER, AGE MAJOR, R/O 1ST LINE, AGRAHARAM, GUNTUR. 10. SRI T PAUL RAJ, S/O NOT KNOWN TO THE PETITIONER, AGE MAJOR, R/O 2ND LINE, AGRAHARAM, GUNTUR. ...RESPONDENT(S): Counsel for the Petitioner: 1. CHEJARLA VENKATESWARA RAO Counsel for the Respondent(S): 1. GP FOR HOME (AP) 2 2. K H V SIVA KUMAR The Court made the following: ORDER: This Writ Petition is filed under Article 226 of Constitution of India with the following prayer for: “.... a Writ Order or direction more particularly one in the nature of Writ of Mandamus declaring the action of the respondents 2 and 3 in not providing police protection by receiving the application for demolition of the oldest building popularly known as Bullar I Hall i e building D No 2778 admeasuring 501 1/3 sq yards situated at Kannavari Thota Ward No 23 old 17 Block No 6 TS No 95 Guntur which is in a dilapidated condition and further insisting the petitioner to get an order from any court for providing such Police Aid as illegal arbitrary unjust and without application of mind ar d consequently direct the respondents 2 and 3 to receive and provide police aid for demolition of the building D No 2778 admeasuring 501 1/3 sq yards situated at Kannavari Thota Ward No 23 old 17 Block No 6 TS No 95 Guntur” 2. Today, when the matter came up for hearing, learned counsel for the petitioner submits that nothing survives for adjudication in the Writ Petition and the matter has become infructuous. 3. Recording the said submission, the Writ Petition is dismissed as infructuous. There shall be no order as to costs. As a sequel thereto, miscellaneous petitions, if any, pending shall stand closed. __________________________________ Dr.VENKATA JYOTHIRMAI PRATAPA, J Date: 01.09.2025 Asr 3 THE HONOURABLE DR JUSTICE VENKATA JYOTHIRMAI PRATAPA W.P.No.3264 of 2020 Dt.01.09.2025 Asr