APHC010721672025 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) TUESDAY,THE THIRD DAY OF FEBRUARY TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY SIX PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE GANNAMANENI RAMAKRISHNA PRASAD WRIT PETITION NO: 36823 OF 2025 Between: 1. GORREPATI SUDHAKAR, S/o. Basaveswararao, Aged 59, R/o. 5-8-15/1, Nagarjuna Nagar, Sattenapalli, Palnadu District, Andhra Pradesh. 2. Cherukuri Srilakshmi,, W/o. Ramakrishna Prasad, Aged 55, R/o. Flat No. 201, Siddhardha Towers, Bhaghameer, Kukatpally, Hyderabad, Telangana. ...Petitioners AND 1. The State of Andhra Pradesh, Municipal Administration and Urban Development Department (MAUD) Rep. by its Principal Secretary, Secretariat Buildings, Velagapudi, Amaravati, Guntur District. 2. The Sattenapalli Municipality, Rep. by its Municipal Commissioner, Sattenapalli, Palnadu District - 522403. 3. The Municipal Commissioner, Sattenapalli Municipality, Sattenapalli, Palnadu District - 522403. 4. The Deputy Executive Engineer, Sattenapalli Municipality, Sattenapalli, Palnadu District - 522403. 5. The Executive Engineer, R AND B Division, Narasaraopet Palnadu District - 522601. ...Respondents Counsel for the Petitioners: P SAI SURYA TEJA Counsel for the Respondents: GP FOR ROADS BUILDINGS Counsel for the Respondents:GP FOR MUNCIPAL ADMN URBAN DEV Counsel for the Respondents:Sireesha Rani Vallabhaneni,Standing Counsel For Municipalities 2 The Court made the following ORAL ORDER: Heard Sri Posani Venkateswarlu, learned Senior Counsel representing Sri P. Sai Surya Teja, learned Counsel for the Writ Petitioners and Ms. Sireesha Rani Vallabhaneni, learned Standing Counsel for Municipalities. 2. Ms. Sireesha Rani Vallabhaneni, learned Standing Counsel for Municipalities has submitted the Written Instructions furnished by the Commissioner, Sattenapalle Municipality, Sattenapalle, dated 21.01.2026. Copy of the Written Instruction is also furnished to the learned Counsel for the Writ Petitioners. This Written Instruction is taken on record. 3. Relevant portion of the Written Instruction is usefully extracted hereunder: “In view of the above circumstances, the Hon'ble High Court of Andhra Pradesh, Amravati, has been pleased to issue interim directions restraining the respondents from proceeding with any construction at the proposed site. It is respectfully submitted that the said work has not been commenced at the proposed location till date. In compliance with the interim orders of the Hon'ble High Court, this office has decided to select an alternative land for the construction of sheds and hereby cancels the proposed site.” 4. The above extract would indicate that further process with regard to the construction of sheds/shops had been stopped in compliance with the Interim Order of this Court dated 02.01.2026. The above extract would also indicate that the Respondents have decided to select an alternate land for construction of sheds/shops, and therefore, they had also cancelled the proposal of constructions of sheds/shops in the subject site. 5. Learned Senior Counsel having gone through the Written Instruction had requested the Court to close the Writ Petition in view of the contents of the Written Instruction dated 21.01.2026. Accordingly, this Writ Petition is disposed of as no further consideration is necessary. No Order as to Costs. 3 6. Interlocutory Applications, if any, stand closed in terms of this order. ______________________________________ GANNAMANENI RAMAKRISHNA PRASAD, J Dt: 03.02.2026 JKS ` 4 81 HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE GANNAMANENI RAMAKRISHNA PRASAD WRIT PETITION No. 36823 OF 2025 03.02.2026 JKS