APHC010233272013 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) [3504] MONDAY,THE SIXTEENTH DAY OF FEBRUARY TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY SIX PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE MAHESWARA RAO KUNCHEAM WRIT PETITION NO: 11380/2013 Between: 1. V.V. PEERAIAH, S/O TIRUPALAIAH,AGED 40 YEARS, SHANKARAVARAM VILLAGE, RANGASAMUDRAM MANDAL, RAJAMPETA, YSR KADAPA DISTRICT ...PETITIONER AND 1. THE STATE DIRECTOR, KHADI AND VILLAGE INDUSTRIAL COMMISSION, STATE OFFICE, NEAR GANDHI BHAVAN, M.J. ROAD, NAMPAILY, HYDERABAD 2. MANAGER, A.P. KHADI & VILLAGE INDUSTRIES NEAR LAXMI RANGA THEATRE, LAXMI NAGAR CIRCLE, YSR DISTRICT, KADAPA 3. SRI RAJESHWARI KHADI GRAMA UDYOGA SANGHAM, PORUMAMILLA MANDAL, RAJAMPET, YSR KADAPA DISTRICT REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY SMT. P.KISTAMMA 4. CIRCLE INSPECTOR, PORUMAMILLA P.S. PORUMAMILLA MANDAL, RAJAMPET, YSR KADAPA DISTRICT 5. TAHSILDAR PORUMAMILLA MANDAL, RAJAMPET, YSR KADAPA DISTRICT ...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 in i he nature of Mandamus or otherwise declaring the action of the 2nd and 31a in interfering with the peaceful possession and enjoyment of the scheduled property in Sy.No.59/5 admeasuring Ac.1.44 cents situated in Rangasamudram Village, Porumilla Mandal, Kadapa District, as arbitrary, illegal, discriminatory violating Article 14, 2 16 and 21 of the Constitution of India and issue consequential directions, restraining the respondents, particularly the 2nd and 3rd respondent from interfering the peaceful possession and enjoyment of the scheduled property in Sy.No.59/5 admeasuring Ac.1.44 cents situated in Rangasamudram Village, Porumilla Mandal, Kadapa District, and pass Counsel for the Petitioner: 1. S V INDIRA Counsel for the Respondent(S): 1. RAJENDRA BUSSA 2. GP FOR HOME 3. GP FOR REVENUE 4. SREEKANTH REDDY AMBATI 5. G KOTINAGULU 6. M A MUJEEB The court made the following ORDER: On 04.01.2024 and 04.02.2026, there was no representation for the petitioner. Again, on 09.02.2026, at the instance of the learned counsel for the petitioner, the matter is listed today under the caption for dismissal. 2. When the matter was called today in the morning session, no one appeared for the petitioner. However, in order to give one more opportunity, the matter was passed over. 3. Even at the revised call in the afternoon session at 2.37 p.m., there is no representation for the petitioner. 4. Sri Rajendra Bussa, learned counsel for the 1st respondent, is present. 3 5. In view of the aforesaid, the writ petition is dismissed for non- prosecution. 6. There shall be no order as to costs. As a sequel, all pending applications shall stand closed. _______________________________ JUSTICE MAHESWARA RAO KUNCHEAM Date: 16.02.2026 GVK 4 68 THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE MAHESWARA RAO KUNCHEAM WRIT PETITION No.11380 of 2013 Date: 16.02.2026 GVK