WP/110/2018 of smt Y.N.Vani Vs STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH on 3 February 2026

1. SMT Y.N.VANI, W/O AVU NARASHIMHA REDDY, AGED ABOUT 35 YEARS, OCC. BUSINEED, R/O D.NO. 4-9 UPSTAIRS, VINAYAKA SUPER MARKET LBS ROAD, PILER TOWN AND MANDAL CHITTOOR DISTRICT.

...PETITIONER AND

1. STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH, ITS PRINCIPAL SECRETARY REVENUE DEPAT SECRETARIT BUILDING

VELAGAPUDI THULURU MANDAL GUNTUR DISRTICT

2. THE DISTRICT COLLECTOR CHITTOOR, CHITTOOR DISTRICT

3. THE REVENUE DIVISINAL OFFICER, MANDANAPALLE CHITTOOR DISTRICT

4. THE TASILDAR SADAM MANDAL, SODAM MANDAL CHITTOOR DISTRICT

5. THE MANDAL SURVEYOR, THE TASILIDAR OFFICE, SODAM CHITTOOR DISTRICT

6. PEENA MASTHA, S/O P AZEEZ SAHED AGED 41YEARS, OCC. BUSINEDD, ESSAR PETROLBUNK, R/O MASJID STREET, SODAM VILLAGE AND MANDAL, CHITTOOR 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 a writ order or direction more particularly one in the nature of WRIT OF MANDAMUS, delaring the action of the respondents in not taking necessary steps on the representation of the petitioner dated 24.10.2017 with regard to illgal construction on the petitoner land in Sy.No. 78/7 and aslo in Sy.No.79/7 of DKT Patta Land of Sodam Village and mandal chittoor district is illegal arbitrary an dviolation of Articcles 14, 21 and 300A of the Constitution of India and conseqently dirct the respondents on the petitioner above land forthwith and to 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 the respondents to demolish the illegal construction on the petitioner’s land in Sy.No. 78/7 and also in Sy.No. 79/10 of DKT Patta Land of Sodam village and Mandal, Chittoor District by duly considering the petitioner representation dated 24-10-2017 Pending disposal of the main writ petition and pass such other order or orders as this Hon’ble Court may deem fit and proper in the circumstances of the case. Counsel for the Petitioner:

1. SRINATH ATMAKUR Counsel for the Respondent(S):

1. GP FOR ASSIGNMENT (AP)

2. SURESH KUMAR REDDY KALAVA

The Court made the following ORDER:

Though the matter was adjourned on 20.01.2026, there was no representation for the petitioner. Hence, the matter is directed to be listed on 28.01.2026. Even on that day there was no representation for the petitioner. Therefore, the matter is directed to be listed today under the caption “for dismissal”.

On the other hand, learned counsel appearing for the unofficial respondent No.6 submits that the matter is settled before the Lok Adalat on 11.09.2021.

Since the cause in the writ petition does not survive for adjudication, the Writ Petition is dismissed as infructuous. There shall be no order as to costs.

As a sequel, miscellaneous applications pending, if any, shall stand dismissed.

__________________________________ JUSTICE SUMATHI JAGADAM Dated: 04.02.2026 KAS

THE HONOURABLE SMT JUSTICE SUMATHI JAGADAM

WRIT PETITION NO: 110/2018

Dated: 04.02.2026 KAS