APHC010607612013 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) [3333] TUESDAY, THE 22nd DAY OF SEPTEMBER 2026 PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SMT JUSTICE V.SUJATHA WRIT PETITION NO: 7244/2013 Between: 1. MALLADI GOPALA KRISHNA RAO, GUNTUR DIST, S/O LATE M. JAGAPATHI RAO, AGED 72 YEARS, OCC: PRIVATE EMPLOYEE, R/O MUNNANGI VILLAGE, KOLLIPARA MANDAL, GUNTUR DISTRICT. ...PETITIONER AND 1. PRL SECY TO GOVT HYDERABAD 2 OTHERS, REP. BY PRINCIPAL SECRETARY TO GOVERNMENT, SECRETARIAT BUILDINGS, HYDERABAD 2. THE SPECIAL OFFICER COMPETENT AUTHORITY, URBAN LAND CEILING, GUNTUR, GUNTUR CITY & DISTRICT. 3. SRI KURRA SAMBASIVA RAO, S/O RAMAKRISHNAIAH, AGED ABOUT 40 YEARS, OCC: EMPLOYEE, R/O D.NO. 15-11-85, LINE, NAVABHARAT COLONY, MANGALAGIRI ROAD, GUNTUR CITY, GUNTUR DISTRICT. PIN: 522001. ...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 toto issue a Writ, order or direction more fully one in the nature of Writ of Mandamus declaring the action of the 1 st respondent herein in issuing the G.O. Ms. No. 629 Revenue (UC.I) Department dated 30-05-2006 in favour of the 3rd respondent herein without properly verifying his title over the land in 2 VS,J W.P.No.7244 of 2013 S.No. 487 of old Guntur of the petitioner herein as illegal, void and capricious and consequently to set aside the aforesaid G.O. Ms. No. 629 dated 30-05- 2006 holding that the 3rd respondent herein has not got the valid title over the subject land in the proceedings U.L.C. No. 1687/1976-B IA NO: 1 OF 2013(WPMP 9078 OF 2013 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 to direct the 1st respondent herein to consider the Enquiry Report of the 2nd respondent herein vide Rc. On U.L.C. No. 1687/76-B dated 0506-2011 and pass appropriate orders forthwith, pending disposal of the above W.P. No. of 2013 Counsel for the Petitioner: 1. MALLADI GOPALA KRISHNA RAO Counsel for the Respondent(S): 1. GP FOR REVENUE 2. B NARASIMHA SARMA The Court made the following: 3 VS,J W.P.No.7244 of 2013 ORDER: On 08.09.2026, it was brought to the notice of this Court that learned counsel for the petitioner is no more, as such, Registry was directed to issue notice to the petitioner; the said notice was returned with an endorsement ‘Addressee left without any instructions’. Subsequently, the Registry was directed to print the name of the petitioner in the cause list. When the matter came up for hearing on 15.09.2026, with the petitioner’s name printed in the cause list, there is no representation on his behalf. As such, the matter was directed to be posted to 22.09.2026 under the caption ‘for dismissal’. Today, though the matter is listed under the caption ‘for dismissal’, there was no representation on behalf of the petitioner. It seems that the petitioner is not evincing any interest in pursuing the matter. In view of the same, this writ petition is dismissed for default. There shall be no order as to costs. Consequently, Miscellaneous Petitions, if any, pending in this Petition shall stand closed. _____________________ JUSTICE V.SUJATHA Dated: 22.09.2026 Gss