APHC010690832025 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI [3558] FRIDAY, THE TWENTY THIRD DAY OF JANUARY TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY SIX PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE CHEEKATI MANAVENDRANATH ROY AND THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE TUHIN KUMAR GEDELA WRIT APPEAL No.1348 of 2025 Between: 1. SMT. SOBHA SWATHI RANI, W/O. GANESH, AGED ABOUT 40 YEARS, R/O.D.NO.48-7-29/12, ANJANA MANSION, FLAT NO.12, SRI NAGAR, VISAKHAPATNAM, VISAKHAPATNAM DISTRICT. ...APPELLANT AND 1. JARTHA LAKSHMAN RAO, S/O. LATE GANESHWARA RAO, AGED ABOUT 41 YEARS, OCC: BUSINESS, R/O. KAKARAPADU VILLAGE, KOYYURU MANDAL, VISAKHAPATNAM DISTRICT. 2. STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH, REP.BY ITS PRINCIPAL SECRETARY, REVENUE DEPARTMENT, SECRETARIAT, AMARAVATI, GUNTUR DISTRICT. 3. THE DISTRICT COLLECTOR AND DISTRICT MAGISTRATE, ANAKAPALLI DISTRICT. 4. THE REVENUE DIVISIONAL OFFICER, NARSIPATNAM, ANAKAPALLI DISTRICT. 2 5. THASILDAR, NATHAVARAM MANDAL, ANAKAPALLI DISTRICT. 6. THE NATIONAL COMMISSION FOR SCHEDULE TRIBES, REP. BY ITS RESEARCH OFFICER, LOKNAYAK BHAWAN, KHAN MARKET, NEW DELHI. 7. DIRECTOR OF MINES AND GEOLOGY, IBRAHIMPATNAM, VIJAYAWADA, NTR DISTRICT. ...RESPONDENT(S): Counsel for the Appellant: 1. K.P.S. SAILESH REDDY Counsel for the Respondent(S): 1. GP FOR REVENUE 2. GP FOR SOCIAL WELFARE 3. GP FOR MINES AND GEOLOGY 4. V V SATISH The Court made the following: 3 THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE CHEEKATI MANAVENDRANATH ROY AND THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE TUHIN KUMAR GEDELA WRIT APPEAL No.1348 of 2025 JUDGMENT: (Per Hon’ble Sri Justice Cheekati Manavendranath Roy) When the writ appeal is taken up for hearing, learned counsel for the appellant seeks permission to withdraw the writ appeal stating that the appellant will pursue her remedy before the learned single Judge in the writ petition that is pending adjudication. 2. Learned counsel for the 1st respondent/writ petitioner vehemently objected to accord permission for withdrawing the writ appeal on the ground that certain allegations are made in the grounds of the appeal and also in the affidavit filed by the appellant stating that the 1st respondent/writ petitioner has resorted to forum shopping and that the learned single Judge has no roster to consider the writ petition and to pass the impugned order. He also submits that the 1st respondent/writ petitioner has already approached the competent authority i.e., Agent to the Government, who got jurisdiction to adjudicate the present dispute, and obtained an interim order in his favour. 3. As regards the first objection is concerned, learned counsel for the appellant fairly concedes to withdraw the said two allegations relating to the forum shopping and want of roster that are made in the appeal grounds and the affidavit. He also agreed for deletion of the said allegations made in the appeal grounds and the affidavit. Therefore, the said allegations are ordered to be deleted from the record. 4 4. As regards the second ground that the 1st respondent/writ petitioner has approached the Agent to the Government and obtained an interim order in his favour is concerned, since the appeal is now being withdrawn by the appellant and it is being dismissed as withdrawn, nothing can be held in respect of the said ground in this writ appeal and the same can be raised before the learned single Judge where the writ petition is still pending adjudication. 5. Therefore, permission, as requested, to withdraw the appeal is accorded. 6. Accordingly, the writ appeal is dismissed as withdrawn. There shall be no order as to costs. As a sequel, interlocutory applications, if any pending, in this case shall stand closed. ________________________________________ JUSTICE CHEEKATI MANAVENDRANATH ROY ______________________________________ JUSTICE TUHIN KUMAR GEDELA Date: 23.01.2026 IBL 5 THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE CHEEKATI MANAVENDRANATH ROY AND THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE TUHIN KUMAR GEDELA WRIT APPEAL No.1348 of 2025 Dt: 23.01.2026 IBL