APHC010527912018 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) [3333] TUESDAY, THE 28th DAY OF JULY 2026 PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SMT JUSTICE V.SUJATHA WRIT PETITION NO: 24942/2018 Between: 1. CHERUKURI MEENAKSHI, W/O. VENKATESHWARA RAO,AGED ABOUT 65 YEARS. OCC.AGRICULTURE, R/O. PRAKASHNAGAR, RAJAHMUNDRY, EAST GODAVARI DISTRICT. 2. CHERUKURI. VENKATESHWARA RAO, S/O LATE NAGESHWARA RAO, AGED ABOUT 74 YEARS, OCC. AGRICULTURE, RIO. PRAKASHNAGAR, RAJAHMUNDRY, EAST GODAVARI DISTRICT. 3. CHERUKURI MANI, W/O. RAIN BABY, AGED ABOUT 58 YEARS, OCC.AGRICULTURE, RIO. PRAKASHNAGAR, RAJAHMUNDRY, EAST GODAVARI DISTRICT. ...PETITIONER(S) AND 1. THE STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH, REP. BY ITS PRINCIPAL SECRETARY, REVENUE. DEPARTMENT, SECRETARIAT VELAGAPUDI, AMARAVATHI, GUNTUR DISTRICT 2. THE JOINT COLLECTOR, EAST GODAVARI DISTRICT, KAKINADA. 3. THE SUBCOLLECTOR, RAJAHMUNDRY, EAST GODAVARI DISTRICT. 4. THE TAHSILDAR, RAJAHMUNDRY RURAL MANDAL, EAST GODAVARI DISTRICT. 5. THE MANDAL REVENUE INSPECTOR, RAJAHMUNDRY RURAL, 2 VS,J W.P.No.24942 of 2018 EAST GODAVARI 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 writ, order or direction more particularly one in the nature of writ of Mandamus to declare the action of the respondent No. 2 to 5 attempting to evict the petitioners from land bearing Sy.No. 615 to an extent of Ac. 1-40 cents, AC.0-77 cents, Ac. 0-50 cents respectively situated at Pidimgoyya Village, Rajahmundry Rural Mandal East Godavari District under the guise of the orders dated. 01-07-2002 in appeal No. R.Dis.D/3297/2001 of ri Respondent and orders dated. 17-02-2002 in case No. Ref.B/501/2000 of the 4th Respondent pertaining to land bearing Sy.No. 614 only, pending disposal of the POT second appeal No. Ref/4370/2002 on the file of the 2nd Respondent, is illegal, arbitrary, unconstitutional and in violation of Article 300- A of the constitution of India and consequently direct respondent No. 2 to 5 not to evict the petitioners from land bearihg Sy.No. 615 to an extent of Ac. 1- 40 cents, Ac. 0-77 cents, Ac. 0-50 cents respectively situated at Pidimgoyya Village, Rajahmundry Rural Mandal East Godavari District under the guise of the orders dated. 01-07-2002 in appeal No. R.Dis.D/3297/2001 of 3rd Respondent and orders dated. 17-02-2002 in case No. Ref.B/501/2000 of the 4th Respondent pertaining to land hearing. Sy.No. 614 only, pending disposal of the POT second appeal No. Ref/4370/2002 on the tile of the 2nd Respondent and pass IA NO: 1 OF 2018 Petition under Section 151 CPC praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed in support of the petition, the High Court may be pleased to direct respondent No. 2 to 5 not to evict the petitioners from land bearing Sy.No. 615 to an extent of Ac.1-40 cents, Ac. 0-77 cents, Ac. 0-50 cents respectively situated at Pidinagoyya Village, Rajahmundry Rural Mandal East Godavari District under the guise of the orders dated: 01-07-2002 in appeal No. R.Dis.D/3297/2001 of 3111 Respondent and orders dated. 17 02-2002 in case No. Ref.B/501/2000 of the 4th Respondent pertaining to land bearing Sy.No. 614 only, pending POT second appeal No. Ref 4370/2002 on the tile of the 2nd Respondent pending disposal of the writ petition and pass Counsel for the Petitioner(S): 3 VS,J W.P.No.24942 of 2018 1. S MADAN MOHAN RAO Counsel for the Respondent(S): 1. GP FOR REVENUE (AP) The Court made the following: 4 VS,J W.P.No.24942 of 2018 ORDER: When the writ petition came up for hearing on 14.07.2026, there was no representation on behalf of counsel for the petitioners, as such, the matter was directed to be posted to 21.07.2026. Even on 21.07.2026, as there was no representation on behalf of the petitioners, the matter was posted to 28.07.2026, under the caption ‘for dismissal’. Today, though the matter is listed under the caption ‘for dismissal’, there was no representation on behalf of counsel for the petitioners. It seems that the petitioners are not evincing any interest in pursuing the matter. In view of the same, this writ petition is dismissed for default. There shall be no order as to costs. Consequently, Miscellaneous Petitions, if any, pending in this Petition shall stand closed. _____________________ JUSTICE V.SUJATHA 28.07.2026 Gss