1 APHC010097052014 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) [3333] FRIDAY ,THE THIRD DAY OF JANUARY TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SMT JUSTICE V.SUJATHA WRIT PETITION NO: 8989/2014 Between: Mortha Ganga Bhanu & Ano. and Others ...PETITIONER(S) AND Secy Mun Admn 4 Ors and Others ...RESPONDENT(S) Counsel for the Petitioner(S): 1. SRINIVASA RAO PAPPU Counsel for the Respondent(S): 1. B D MAHESWARA REDDY 2. Sireesha Rani Vallabhaneni,Standing Counsel For Municipalities 3. GP FOR MUNCIPAL ADMN AND URBAN DEV 4. T V S PRABHAKARA RAO The Court made the following: 2 ORDER: This Writ Petition is filed by the petitioners, under Article 226 of the Constitution of India seeking Mandamus, for the following relief: “…to issue a Writ, Order or direction more particularly one in the nature of Writ of Mandamus declaring the impugned in action on the part of the respondents 2 & 3 against the complaint made by the petitioners Dt.11.3.2014 and allowing the respondents 4 & 5 to make illegal constructions without obtaining any permission or approved plan from the Amalapuram Muncipality in respect of the property of the petitioners in R.S.No.417/63A situated in Muslim Street, Amalapuram, East Godavari District as illegal, arbitrary and violative of the principles of natural justice and consequently direct the respondents 2 & 3 to stop the illegal constructions being undertaken by the respondents 4 & 5...” 2. Today when the matter came up for hearing, Ms.V.Sireesha Rani, learned Standing Counsel, has furnished a copy of instructions of respondent No.3 dated 02.01.2025, wherein it is stated that the complaint petition filed by the petitioner on 26.03.2014 is not available in their office. As such, no action would be initiated as against complaint made by the petitioner on 01.04.2014. It is further submitted that the building plan was already sanctioned by the then Municipality Commissioner in favour of respondent No.5 on 01.02.2013 vide B.A.No.226/12 and thereafter the 5th respondent has also completed the constructions of the said building in accordance to the building plan. 3. In view of the fact that the unofficial respondents have made constructions in the said building in pursuance of the building permission 3 sanctioned on 01.02.2013 by the then Municipal Commissioner, Amalapuram, this Court is of the opinion that no cause survives. 4. Accordingly, the Writ Petition is disposed of. No order as to costs. Consequently miscellaneous applications pending, if any, in the Writ Petition, shall also stand closed. ___________________ JUSTICE V.SUJATHA Date : 03.01.2025 JLV