APHC010482222025 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) [3209] WEDNESDAY, THE ELEVENTH DAY OF FEBRUARY TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY SIX PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE NINALA JAYASURYA WRIT PETITION NO: 24497/2025 Between: 1. SRI DEVARA SURI APPA RAO,, S/O LATE DEVARA APPA RAO, AGED ABOUT 38 YEARS, D.NO.8-148, OPP. GVMC, MADHURAWADA, VISAKHAPATNAM. 2. SRI DEVARA TRINADH,, S/O LATE DEVARA APPA RAO, AGED ABOUT 34 YEARS, D.NO.8-148, OPP. GVMC, MADHURAWADA, VISAKHAPATNAM. 3. SRI DEVARA SURESH,, S/O LATE RAMBABU, AGED ABOUT 31 YEARS, D.NO.9-25, SRIVALLI NAGAR, 0PP. ELECTRICAL OFFICE MADHURAWADA, VISAKHAPATNAM. 4. SRI DEVARA RAMESH,, S/O LATE RAMBABU, AGED ABOUT 29 YEARS, D.NO.9-26, SRIVALLI NAGAR, 0PP. ELECTRICAL OFFICE, MADHURAWADA, VISAKHAPATNAM. 5. SMT. DEVARA APPALA NARASAMMA,, D/O LATE RAMBABU, AGED ABOUT 38 YEARS, D.NO.9-26, SRIVALLI NAGAR, 0PP. ELECTRICAL OFFICE MADHURAWADA, VISAKHAPATNAM. REP. BY THEIR GPA HOLDER, GODAVARTHI RAMAKRISHNA RAO, S/O LATE VENKANNA, AGED ABOUT 79 YEARS, OCC BUSINESS, R/O HO.NO.14-10-2/7, BC ROAD, GAJUWAKA, VISAKHAPATNAM. ...PETITIONER(S) AND 1. THE STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH, REP. BY ITS PRINCIPAL SECRETARY, INFORMATION TECHNOLOGY, ELECTRONICS AND NJS,J W.P No.24497 of 2025 2 COMMUNICATIONS DEPARTMENT, SECRETARIAT, VELAGAPUDI, AMARAVATI. 2. THE STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH, REP. BY ITS PRINCIPAL SECRETARY, REVENUE DEPARTMENT, SECRETARIAT, VELAGAPUDI, AMARAVATI. 3. THE VICE CHAIRMAN AND MANAGING DIRECTOR, ANDHRA PRADESH INDUSTRIAL INFRASTRUCTURE CORPORATION LTD. (APIIC), VIJAYAWADA, KRISHNA DISTRICT. 4. THE MANAGING DIRECTOR, ANDHRA PRADESH TECHNOLOGY SERVICES LTD. (APTS), VIJAYAWADA. 5. THE DIRECTOR OF SURVEY AND SETTLEMENTS, 4TH FLOOR, APIIC BUILDINGS, MANGALAGIRI, GUNTUR DISTRICT. 6. THE DISTRICT COLLECTOR, VISAKHAPATNAM DISTRICT 7. THE TAHSILDAR, VISAKHAPATNAM RURAL MANDAL VISAKHAPATNAM DISTRICT. 8. THE VICE CHAIRMAN, VISAKHAPATNAM URBAN DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY (VUDA), VISAKHAPATNAM. 9. M/S SIFY INFINIT SPACES LIMITED, ADDRESS.LL FLOOR,TIDEL PARK NO.4,RAJIV GANDHI SALAI, TARAMANI, CHENNAI,-600113 PH 04422540770 ...RESPONDENT(S): Counsel for the Petitioner(S): 1. SHAIK ASIF Counsel for the Respondent(S): 1. NUTHALAPATI MOHAN 2. SOMISETTY GANESH BABU SC For VUDA and MUDA 3. SANTHI CHANDRA SC For APIIC 4. THE ADVOCATE GENERAL 5. C V R RUDRA PRASAD NJS,J W.P No.24497 of 2025 3 The Court made the following Order: The present writ petition is filed seeking to declare the action of the respondents in allotting land admeasuring an extent of Ac.25.00 cents in Survey No.134 of Paradesipalem Village, Visakhapatnam to APIIC/APTS for onward transfer to M/s. Sift Infinit Spaces Limited under G.O.Ms.No.29, dated 01.08.2025 as illegal, arbitrary, without jurisdiction and violative of petitioners’ rights and consequently to delete the said extent of land from G.O.Ms.No.29 dated 01.08.2025. 2. Heard learned counsel for the petitioners. Also heard Ms. Santhi Chandra, learned Standing Counsel for A.P.I.I.C. and Mr. C V R Rudra Prasad, learned counsel for respondent No.9. Perused the material on record. 3. The case of the petitioners as set out in the affidavit filed in support of the writ petition, in brief, is that they are the legal heirs of late Sri Devara Appayya, who was granted a patta on 03.03.1905 for an extent of Ac.80.00 of land situate in Paradesipalem Village, Chinagadili Mandal, Visakhapatnam District, corresponding to the present Survey Nos.134 and 143. The father of the petitioner Nos.1 & 2 and petitioner Nos.3 to 5 were managing their respective units of joint family. Further that subsequent to the abolition of Vizianagaram Estate under the provisions of the Madras Estates (Abolition and Conversion into Ryotwari) Act, 1948, the subject lands became eligible for recognition under Section 11(a) of the said Act and the claims made by them before the Joint Collector - Cum - Settlement Officer were rejected on 06.06.2023. It is their further case that they filed Revision Petitions against the said order before the Director of Survey and Settlement, and the above referred G.O. was issued, notwithstanding the pendency of the revision petitions. 4. The learned counsel for the petitioners inter alia submits that alienation of subject matter lands during the pendency of the petitioners’ claim/revisions is wholly arbitrary, illegal and in those circumstances, the petitioners filed the NJS,J W.P No.24497 of 2025 4 present writ petition and a learned Judge of this Court was inclined to grant interim direction to maintain status quo vide order dated 13.10.2025. He submits that despite his best efforts, he could not secure any instructions, for filing reply-affidavit to the counter-affidavits filed on behalf of the respective respondents. 5. In the counter-affidavits various factual aspects with regard to the land situated in Survey No.134 of Paradesipalem Village were clearly set out. The alienation of subject matter land in favour of the respondent No.9 for development of Information Technology in Visakhapatnam and the potential employment opportunities were also explained. That apart, after filing of the said counter-affidavit vide memo dated 14.11.2025, a copy of the order dated 30.10.2025 passed by the Director of Settlements/Revisional Authority dismissing the revision petitions is also filed. 6. In the counter-affidavit filed by the respondent No.6 represented by the learned Advocate General, the relevant aspects with regard to the nature of the subject matter land and the alienation of the same to the respondent No.3 pursuant to the decision of the State Investment Promotion Board @ Rs.50 lakhs per acre were set out. 7. The respondent No.9 represented by Mr. C V R Rudra Prasad, learned counsel, filed a detailed counter-affidavit inter alia to the effect that the writ petition is not maintainable. Be that as it may. 8. Despite granting sufficient time, the petitioners for the reasons best known to them, did not choose to file reply-affidavits contradicting the averments made in the counter-affidavits of the respective respondents. Non filing of the reply-affidavit is fatal to the case of the petitioners and tantamounts to admission of the averments made in the said counter- affidavits. Therefore, the matter does not call for detailed appreciation of rival contentions. NJS,J W.P No.24497 of 2025 5 9. Further, the main contention raised in the writ petition is alienation of the subject matter property during the pendency of the revision petitions before the Competent Authority. Since it is a matter of record now that the said revision petitions were dismissed by an order dated 30.10.2025; this Writ Petition is disposed off, leaving it open to the petitioners to work out their remedies against the said orders. Interim orders granted by this Court shall stand vacated. No costs. Miscellaneous petitions pending, if any, shall stand closed. __________________________ JUSTICE NINALA JAYASURYA Date:11.02.2026 Ksj