Dismissed¶34

Mokkapati Deva Mohana Rao, v. The state of Andhra Pradesh

Andhra Pradesh HC17 Aug 2025WP/97/2020

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Dismissal as infructuous of Article 226 writ seeking mandamus to implement GOMS No. 32 dated 24-03-2015 by closing sand reach in Yellapuram Gram Panchayat, Musunuru Mandal, Krishna District, and restraining sand excavation in Tammileru River; petitioner's counsel conceded cause did not survive; no costs; misc. petitions closed; bench: Venkateswarlu Nimmagadda, J.; 18.08.2025.

What did the court decide?

None; writ petition dismissed as infructuous on counsel's submission, with no order as to costs, and miscellaneous petitions, if any, stood closed. ¶34

Mokkapati Deva Mohana Rao, Vs The state of… — Writ and Judicial Review | Andhra Pradesh HC (2025)

¶1

[3329]

¶2

APHC010000402020

¶3

IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI

¶4

(Special Original Jurisdiction)

¶5

MONDAY,THE EIGHTEENTH DAY OF AUGUST TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE

¶6

PRESENT

¶7

THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE VENKATESWARLU NIMMAGADDA WRIT PETITION NO: 97/2020

¶8

Between:

¶9

MOKKAPATI DEVA MOHANA RAO,, S/O SATYANARAYANA, HINDU AGED ABOUT 55 YEARS, OCCU. CULTIVATION R/O YELLAPURAM VILLAGE, MUSUNURU MANDAL, KRISHNA DISTRICT

¶10

...PETITIONER

¶11

AND

¶12

THE STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH, REP BY ITS PRL SECRETARY, PANCHAYATH RAJ AND RURAL DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT, SECRETARIAT, VELAGAPUDI, AMARAVATHI, GUNTUR DISTRICT.

¶13

THE DISTRICT COLLECTOR, KRISHNA, AT MACHILIPATNAM, KRISHNA DISTRICT.

¶14

THE SUB COLLECTOR, NUZVID, NUZVID, KRISHNA DISTRICT.

¶15

THASILDAR, MUSUNURU MANDAL, MUSUNURU, KRISHNA DISTRICT.

¶16

THE GRAM PANCHAYATH YELLAPURAM, REP BY ITS SECRETARY, YELLAPURAM, MUSUNURU MANDAL, KRISHNA DISTRICT.

¶17

...RESPONDENT(S):

¶18

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 an appropriate Writ, Order or Direction more particularly one in the nature of Writ of Mandamus declaring the inaction of the

¶19

respondents 2 to 5 in implementing the GOMS NO 32 dated 24-03-2015 issued by the 1st respondent as illegal arbitrary and violation of principles of natural justice and violation of Article 14 of Constitution of India and cor sequently direct the respondents to implement the said GOMS by closing the sand reach situated within the Gram Panchayat limits of Yellapuram Village Musunuru Mandal Krishna District and not to permit sand excavation in Tammileru River within the limits of Yellapuram Gram Panchayat in the interest of Justice and pass

¶20

IA NO: 1 OF 2020

¶21

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 pleased to direct the respondents to close the sand reach situated within the limits of Yellapuram Gram Panchayath forthwith pending disposal of the writ petition and to pass

¶22

Counsel for the Petitioner:

¶23

1.BONE RAMA SHANKAR RAO

¶24

Counsel for the Respondent(S):

¶25

1.N SRIHARI (Standing Counsel for ZPP MPP and GRAM PANCHAYAT)

¶26

2.GP FOR PANCHAYAT RAJ RURAL DEV (AP)

¶27

The Court made the following:

¶28

THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE VENKATESWARLU NIMMAGADDA

¶29

WRIT PETITON NO.97 OF 2020

¶30

ORDER:

¶31

Heard learned counsel for the petitioner(s) and learned counsel for the respondents.

¶32

When the matter is taken up for hearing, learned counsel for the petitioner(s) submits that the cause in the present writ petition does not survive for further adjudication and the matter becomes infructuous.

¶33

Recording the said submission, the writ petition is dismissed as

¶34

infructuous. There shall be no order as to costs.

¶35

As a sequel, miscellaneous petitions, if any, pending shall stand closed.

¶36

__________________________________ VENKATESWARLU NIMMAGADDA, J 18.08.2025

¶37

BSP

¶38

¶39

HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE VENKATESWARLU NIMMAGADDA

¶40

WRIT PETITION NO.97 of 2020

¶41

18.08.2025

¶42

BSP

Mokkapati Deva Mohana Rao, v. The state of Andhra Pradesh

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Mokkapati Deva Mohana Rao, v. The state of Andhra Pradesh

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Why is it important?

What the court decided

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

L Rama Siva Reddy Vs Sri Shashi Bhushan Kumar IAS

M/s. Somu Constructions, Vs The State of Andhra Pradesh

Sri Sri Vigneswara Constructions Vs Sri. Shashi Bhushan Kumar,Ias

Maramreddy Ramanamma Vs The state of Andhra Pradesh

T Venkata Muni Vs The Government of Andhra Pradesh

Jangili Venkatarama Rao Vs The State of Andhra Pradesh