APHC010259002017 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) [3327] THURSDAY,THE FIFTH DAY OF MARCH TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY SIX PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE K SREENIVASA REDDY WRIT PETITION NO.14329 OF 2017 Between: Nalla Narayana Murthy and others ...PETITIONERS AND The Union of India and others ...RESPONDENTS Counsel for the Petitioners: 1. K SAI KRISHNA MOHAN RAO Counsel for the Respondents: 1. SUNDARI R PISUPATI The Court made the following ORDER: The Writ Petition is filed seeking the following relief. “…….to issue an appropriate Writ, order or direction more particularly one in the nature of Writ of Mandamus directing the respondents to appoint an ad hoc technical committee consisting of Government Engineers specialized in National Highways along with the State Government Revenue Officials to review the entire project of NH- SRK, J WP No.14329 of 2017 2 216 between Thimmapuram to Yanam Road via Madhapuram to Yanam Road via Madhapatnam, Ganganapalli inside village, Kovvuru Medaline, Turinga, Nadakduru to Timmapuram to Yanam Road via Kovvuru Bhavaram, Koripella, Penikuduru, Chollingipeta, which falls in the outer ring road instead of the project being constructed inside all the villages, which are to be effected by this project in the interest of justice.” 2. On earlier occasions, as there was no representation on behalf of the petitioners, the matter was being adjourned from time to time. Whereas, on 23.02.2026, learned counsel for the respondents submitted that cause in the Writ Petition does not survive and the matter has become infructuous. In view of the said reason, the matter was directed to be listed on 02.03.2026 under the caption „For Orders‟. Again, as there was no representation on behalf of the petitioners on 02.03.2026, the matter was directed to be listed today under the caption „For Dismissal‟. Though the matter is listed today under the caption „For Dismissal‟, there is no representation on behalf of the petitioners. 3. The conduct of the petitioners in not appearing, despite the matter being listed under the captions „For Orders‟ and „For Dismissal‟, clearly indicates that they are not interested in prosecuting the case. On the other hand, learned counsel for the respondents already submitted that the cause in the Writ Petition SRK, J WP No.14329 of 2017 3 does not survive for adjudication and the matter has become infructuous. 4. In view of the said reasons, the Writ Petition is dismissed for non-prosecution. There shall be no order as to costs. As a sequel thereto, the miscellaneous applications, if any, pending in this Writ Petition shall stand closed. ________________________ K. SREENIVASA REDDY, J. Date:05.03.2026 Nsr SRK, J WP No.14329 of 2017 4 HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE K. SREENIVASA REDDY Writ Petition No.14329 of 2017 Date:05.03.2026 Nsr