APHC010021082019 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) [3504] THURSDAY,THE NINETEENTH DAY OF FEBRUARY TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY SIX PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE MAHESWARA RAO KUNCHEAM WRIT PETITION NO: 969/2019 Between: 1. MARABATHUNI ANJANEYULU, S/O. VENKAIAH, AGED 74 YEARS, CULTIVATION, R/O. RAMANJANEYAPURAM VILLAGE, KOMMALAPADU POST, BALLIKURVA MANDAL, PRAKASAM DISTRICT, A.P. 2. MARABATHUNI SRIHARI RAO, S/O. SIVARAMA KRISHNAIAH, AGED 60 YEARS, CULTIVATION, R/O. RAMANJANEYAPURAM VILLAGE, BALLIKURVA MANDAL, PRAKASAM DISTRICT, A.P. 3. MARABATHUNI SURYANARAYANA, S/O. SIVARAMA KRISHNAIAH, AGED 58 YEARS, CULTIVATION, R/O. RAMANJANEYAPURAM VILLAGE, BALLIKURVA MANDAL, PRAKASAM DISTRICT, A.P. 4. MARABATHUNI SUNKULAIAH, S/O. SIVARAMA KRISHNAIAH, AGED 52 YEARS, CULTIVATION, R/O. RAMANJANEYAPURAM VILLAGE, BALLIKURVA MANDAL, PRAKASAM DISTRICT, A.P. 5. MARABATHUNI SRIKRISHNA MURTHY, S/O. SIVARAMA KRISHNAIAH, AGED 48 YEARS, CULTIVATION, R/O. RAMANJANEYAPURAM VILLAGE, BALLIKURVA MANDAL, PRAKASAM DISTRICT, A.P. 6. MARABATHUNI KOTAMMA, W/O. ANANTHA PADMANABHAIAH, AGED 68 YEARS, BUSAVARIPALEM VILLAGE, MUKTESWARAM POST, BALLIKURVA MANDAL, PRAKASAM DISTRICT, A.P. 7. MARABATHUNI GOPALAKRISHNA MURTHY, S/O. ANANTHA PADMANABHAIAH, AGED 49 YEARS, D.NO. 25-18-40/1, SAMPATH NAGAR, GUNTUR, A.P. 8. MARABATHUNI SANKARAIAH, S/O. ANANTHA PADMANABHAIAH, AGED 39 YEARS, R/O. RAMANJANEYAPURAM VILLAGE, 2 BALLIKURVA MANDAL, PRAKASAM DISTRICT, A.P. 9. MARABATHUNI KOTESWARA RAO, S/O. ANANTHA PADMANABHAIAH, AGED 37 YEARS, R/O. RAMANJANEYAPURAM VILLAGE, BALLIKURVA MANDAL, PRAKASAM DISTRICT, A.P. 10. MARABATHUNI EDUKONDALU, S/O.ANANTHA PADMANABHAIAH, BUSAVARIPALEM VILLAGE, MUKTESWARAM POST, BALLIKURVA MANDAL, PRAKASAM DISTRICT, A.P. 11. MARABATHUNI ANJANEYULU, S/O. ANANTHA PADMANABHAIAH, AGED 33 YEARS, R/O. RAMANJANEYAPURAM VILALGE, BALLIKURVA MANDAL, PRAKASAM DISTRICT, A.P. 12. MARABATHUNI RAMA LAKSHAMMA, W/O. LAKSHMI KRUPAIAH, AGED 64 YEARS, R/O. RAMANJANEYAPURAM VILLAGE, BALLIKURVA MANDAL, PRAKASAM DISTRICT, A.P. 13. MARABATHUNI ANJANEYULU, MARABATHUNI ANJANEYULU, S/O. LAKSHMI KRUPAIAH, AGED 46 YEARS, R/O. RAMANJANEYAPURAM VILLAGE, BALLIKURVA MANDAL, PRAKASAM DISTRICT, A.P. 14. MARABATHUNI KOTILINGAM, MARABATHUNI KOTILINGAM, S/O. LAKSHMI KRUPAIAH, AGED 37 YEARS, R/O. RAMANJANEYAPURAM VILLAGE, BALLIKURVA MANDAL, PRAKASAM DISTRICT, A.P. 15. MARABATHUNI MANGAMMA, MARABATHUNI MANGAMMA, W/O. VENKATA RAMANAIAH, AGED 68 YEARS, R/O. RAMANJANEYAPURAM VILLAGE, BALLIKURVA MANDAL, PRAKASAM DISTRICT, A.P. 16. MARABATHUNI SRINIVASA RAO, S/O. VENKATA RAMANAIAH, AGED 51 YEARS, RIO. RAMA JANEYAPURAM VILLAGE, BALLIKURVA MANDAL, PRAKASAM DISTRICT, A.P. ...PETITIONER(S) AND 1. GOVERNMENT OF ANDHRA PRADESH, GOVERNMENT OF ANDHRA PRADESH, REP. BY ITS PRINCIPLE SECRETARY, MINES AND GEOLOGY, A.P. SECRETARIAT, VELAGAPUDI, GUNTUR DISTRICT. 2. DIRECTOR OF MINES AND GEOLOGY, DIRECTOR OF MINES AND GEOLOGY, SRI ANJANEYA TOWERS, D.NO. 7-104, B.,BLOCK, 5TH AND 6TH FLOORS, IBRAHIMPATNAM, VIJAYAWADA, KRISAHNA 3 DISTRICT-521456. 3. ASST DIRECTOR OF MINES AND GEOLOGY, OPP. PRAKASAM BHAVAN, TRUNK ROAD, ONGOLE, PRAKASAM DISTRICT, A.P. 4. THE DISTRICT COLLECTOR AND MAGISTRATE, PRAKASAM DISTRICT, ONGOLE. 5. THE TAHASILDAR, THE TAHASILDAR, BALLIKURVA MANDAL, PRAKASAM DISTRICT. 6. M/S VASHISTA MINERALS, REP. BY ITS PARTNER VEMULA PRASAD, NO. 19/10, THIRUMOORTHY STREET, T.NAGAR, CHENNAI-600 017. 7. VEMULA PRASAD, S/O. BALA SUBBA RAYUDU, AGED 53 YEARS, NO. 19/10, THIRUMOORTHY STREET, T.NAGAR, CHENNAI-600 017 ...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 any writ, order or direction more particularly one in the nature of writ of mandamus declaring the action of the respondent in granting permissions to the 6th and 7th i11 respondents to carry on quarry operations in the land of the petitioners in agraharam S.No. 103 (part of present S.No. 475) of Chennupalli Vilalge, Ballikurva Mandal, Prakasam District in an extent of Ac. 10.00 cents, as illegal, arbitrary, highhanded, in violation of principles of natural justice, contrary to the orders of this Hon'ble court passed in S.A.M.P.No.12730 of 2004 in S.A.No. 1282 of 2004 and in vilation of Article 300 A of the Constitution of India and consequently set aside the Proceedings of the 2nct respondent in Proceedings Nos. 12252/R2-2/2010 and 12240/R2-2/2010 both dated 06.05.2015 IA NO: 1 OF 2019 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 respondents not to carry on quarry operations in the land of petitioners in an extent of Ac.10.00 cents in agraharam S.No. 103 (part of present S.No. 475) of Chennupalli Village, Ballikurva Mandal, Prakasam District, till the disposal of the above writ Petition 4 Counsel for the Petitioner(S): 1. SINGAM SRINIVASA RAO Counsel for the Respondent(S): 1. KARNAM RAMESH 2. GP FOR MINES AND GEOLOGY (AP) 3. GP FOR REVENUE The Court made the following: 5 ORDER: The present Writ Petition, filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, seeking the following main prayer: “…to issue an appropriate writ, order, or direction, more particularly one in the nature of a writ of mandamus, declaring the action of the respondents in granting permission to Respondent Nos. 6 and 7 to carry on quarry operations in the petitioners’ land situated in Agraharam, Survey No. 103 (part of present Survey No. 475) of Chennupalli Village, Ballikurva Mandal, Prakasam District, admeasuring Ac. 10.00 cents, as illegal, arbitrary, high-handed, and in violation of the principles of natural justice; contrary to the orders of this Hon’ble Court passed in S.A.M.P. No. 12730 of 2004 in S.A. No. 1282 of 2004; and in violation of Article 300-A of the Constitution of India; and consequently to set aside the proceedings of the 2nd respondent in Proceedings Nos. 12252/R2-2/2010 and 12240/R2-2/2010, both dated 06.05.2015.” 2. M/s. Singam Srinivasa Rao, learned counsel for the petitioners appearing through virtual mode, would submit that, in view of subsequent events that have taken place in the lis, the cause in the Writ Petition does not survive for further adjudication and the Writ Petition has become infructuous. 6 3. Recording the submission made by learned counsel for the petitioners, the Writ Petition is dismissed as infructuous. There shall be no orders as to costs. As a sequel thereto, the miscellaneous petitions, if any, pending in this Writ Petition shall stand closed. ____________________________________ JUSTICE MAHESWARA RAO KUNCHEAM 19th February, 2026 cbn 7 131 THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE MAHESWARA RAO KUNCHEAM WRIT PETITION No.969 of 2019 19th February, 2026 cbn