Andhra Pradesh High Court
WP/16881/2015 of G. Venkata Rama Chandra Raju, Vs The District Collecter, West Godavari, Eluru on 29 January 2026
IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) [3163] FRIDAY, THE THIRTIETH DAY OF JANUARY TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY SIX PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE CHEEKATI MANAVENDRANATH ROY WRIT PETITION NO: 16881/2015 Between: 1. G. VENKATA RAMA CHANDRA RAJU,,
APHC010521012015
IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH
AT AMARAVATI
(Special Original Jurisdiction)
FRIDAY,THE THIRTIETH DAY OF JANUARY
TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY SIX
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE CHEEKATI MANAVENDRANATH ROY
WRIT PETITION NO: 16881/2015
Between:
1. G. VENKATA RAMA CHANDRA RAJU,, S/O RAMA KRISHNAM RAJU
AGED ABOUT 48 YEARS, OCC: AGRICULTURE, R/O CHINAMIRAM,
BHIMAVARAM MANDAL, WEST GODAVARI DISTRICT
2. G. PURUSHOTHAMA RAJU,, S/O RAMA KRISHNAM RAJU AGED
ABOUT 44 YEARS, OCC: AGRICULTURE, R/O CHINAMIRAM, BHIMAVARAM MANDAL, WEST GODAVARI DISTRICT
3. G. NAGAMANI,, W/O VENKATA SRI RAMA RAJU, AGED ABOUT 40
YEARS OCC: AGRICULTURE, R/O CHINAMIRAM, BHIMAVARAM
MANDAL, WEST GODAVARI DISTRICT
4. G. PADMA PRATYUSHAPALLAVI,, D/O VENKATA SRI RAMA RAJU
BHIMAVARAM MANDAL, WEST GODAVARI DISTRICT
5. G. ANASUYAMMA,, W/O RAMA KRISHNAM RAJU AGED ABOUT 60
YEARS, OCC: AGRICULTURE, R/O CHINAMIRAM, BHIMAVARAM
MANDAL, WEST GODAVARI DISTRICT
6. G. UDAY KIRAN VARMA,, S/O VENKATA RAMA CHANDRA RAJU
AGED ABOUT 24 YEARS, OCC: AGRICULTURE, R/O CHINAMIRAM,
BHIMAVARAM MANDAL, WEST GODAVARI DISTRICT
...PETITIONER(S)
AND
1. THE DISTRICT COLLECTER WEST GODAVARI ELURU, -
2. THE LAND ACQUISITION OFFICER, AND REVENUE DIVISIONAL
OFFICER, NARSAPUR, WEST GODAVARI DISTRICT
3. STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH, REP., BY ITS PRINCIPAL
SECRETARY,
REVENUE
DEPARTMENT,
SECRETARIAT
BUILDINGS, HYDERABAD
...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 or Order or Direction more in the nature of Writ of Mandamus or any other appropriate order by declaring the action of the second respondent in issuing notice under Sec. 9(3) and 10 of the Land Acquisition Act 1 of 1894 vide notice in Rc.No. 2863/2008/B dt. 25.05.2015
which is served to the petitioners on 06.06.2015, as illegal, arbitrary, violative of Sec. 9(2) of Act 1 of 1894 and Sec. 21 (2) of Act 30 of 2013 and consequentially declare that the Land Acquisition proceedings initiated to acquire the lands of the petitioners at S.Nos 172/1, 172/2, 172/4, 172/5 and 172/6 over an extent of ac. 9.34 cents of Chinamiram village, Bhimavaram Mandal, West Godavari District are lapsed IA NO: 1 OF 2015(WPMP 21904 OF 2015
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 first and second respondents not to proceed further without complying the mandatory provisions of Sec. 9(2) and 10 of Act 1 of 1894 and Sec. 21 and 22 of Act 30 of 2013 for acquiring the lands of the petitioners in S.Nos. 172/1, 172/2, 172/4, 172/5 and 172/6 over an extent of ac. 9.34 cents of Chinamiram village, Bhimavaram Mandal, West Godavari District, pending disposal of the above Writ Petition IA NO: 1 OF 2016(WVMP 3711 OF 2016
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 dismiss the writ petition duly vacating the interim orders dt: 16-6-2016 in WP.No.16881/2015
Counsel for the Petitioner(S):
1. O M R LAW FIRM
Counsel for the Respondent(S):
1. GP FOR REVENUE (AP)
2. GP FOR LAND ACQUISITION (AP)
The Court made the following:
Citations and Judicial Treatment
Cited by
0
Decisions in the index citing it
Cites
0
Decisions referred to
In this index
0
Of the decisions it cites
Overruled / Questioned
0
No negative treatment found
Loading the citing and cited decisions…
This judgment in the centre: on the left the decisions it cites, on the right the decisions citing it. Colour is the treatment; choose a decision to open it.
ORDER:
When the matter is taken up for hearing, learned Senior Counsel for the petitioners submits that the writ petition has become infructuous and no orders are required to be passed in it.
2. Therefore, recording the above submission made by the learned counsel for the petitioners, the Writ Petition is dismissed as infructuous. There shall be no order as to costs. Pending applications, if any, shall stand closed.
___________________________________ CHEEKATI MANAVENDRANATH ROY, J. Date: 30.01.2026 ARR
HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE CHEEKATI MANAVENDRANATH ROY
WRIT PETITION NO: 16881/2015
Date: 30.01.2026
ARR