Andhra Pradesh High Court
WP/11694/2026 of SANDHIREDDY RATTAMMA Vs The State of Andhra Pradesh on 5 October 2026
IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) TUESDAY, THE 6th DAY OF OCTOBER 2026 PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE RAVI CHEEMALAPATI WRIT PETITION NO: 11694 OF 2026 Between: 1. SANDHIREDDY RATTAMMA, W/o. late.Buchhaiah Aged about 70 years, Occ.
APHC010223882026
IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH
AT AMARAVATI
(Special Original Jurisdiction)
TUESDAY, THE 6th DAY OF OCTOBER 2026
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE RAVI CHEEMALAPATI
WRIT PETITION NO: 11694 OF 2026
Between:
1. SANDHIREDDY RATTAMMA, W/o. late.Buchhaiah Aged about 70 years, Occ. Housewife R/o. D.No. 3-17, 60 feet road, Dibbala Road Satyanarayanapuram, Ongole, Prakasam District-523001.
2. Sri Sandireddy Rama krishna, S/o Late ButchaiahAged about 46 years, Occ. Driver, R/a D.No.4-23/b Ayyanna Vari Street Dibbala Road, 48th Division, Ongole Town, Prakasam District-523001
3. Sri Sandireddy Raghava, S/o late Butchaiah Aged about 42 years,Occ.
Working at Amron Battaries, R/o D No4 -23/b Ayyanna Vari Street Dibbala Road. 48th Division. Ongole Town, Prakasam District -523001.
4. Smt. Panduri Rajeswri,, W/o. late Anil Aged about 39 years, Occ.
Housewife, R/o. 3-18, SatyanaranapuramI, 60 feet road Ongole Town and Mandal, Prakasam District-523001.
...Petitioners
AND
1. The State of Andhra Pradesh, Rep. by its Principle Secretary, Revenue Department, A.P. Secretariat Amaravathi, Guntur District-522237.
2. The District Collector, Ongole, Prakasam District-523001.
3. The Revenue Divisional Officer, Ongole, Prakasam District-523boi.
4. The Deputy Superintendent of Police, Ongole, Prakasam District-523001.
5. The Deputy Transport Commissioner, Ongole, Prakasam District-523001.
6. Smt Sandhireddy Kanakadurga, W/o. late. Balakrishna, aged about 36
years, Occ. Housewife, R/o. D.No.10-2-16, Near Bustand, Nidadavolu Village and Mandal, East Godavari District-534301
...Respondents
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 topleased to issue a writ, order or direction more particularly one in the nature of Writ of Mandamus declaring that the action of the Respondent Nos.2 to 5 and their subordinate officers are interfering in civil dispute between the 1st petitioner and 6th Respondent in spite of having Ad-interim injunction vide lA No. 141 of 2024 in OS.No. 24 of 2024 dated.18.03.2024 on the file of the court of the Senior civil Judge court, Ongole, Prakasam District by issuing notices vide. RC.No.H/2239/2025 dated. 10.04.2026 and 23.03.2026 without having jurisdiction at the behest and influence of the Respondent No.6 as wholly arbitrary, illegal, without jurisdiction and void and violated the principles of natural justice and affected my rights guaranteed under Articles 14,15 'I9(1)(9). 21 and 300-A of the Constitution of India and consequently to grant Stay the Proceeding vide Rc.No.H/2239/2025 dated 10.04.2026 and 23.03.2026 till finalization of the Civil Suit pending OS.No.24
of 2024 on the file of the court of the Senior civil Judge court, Ongole, Prakasam District and to pas IA NO: 1 OF 2026
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 grant Stay the Proceeding vide Rc No H/2239/2025 dated.10.04.2026 and 23.03.2026 till finalization of the Civil Suit pending OS.No.24 of 2024 on the
file of the court of the Senior civil Judge court, Ongole, Prakasam District forthwith pending disposal of the above writ petition and to pass Counsel for the Petitioners: RACHURI LAKSHMIKAR
Counsel for the Respondents:
1) GP FOR HOME
2) GP FOR REVENUE
3) GP FOR TRANSPORT
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:
Sri D.Harsha Vardhan, learned counsel representing Sri Rachuri Lakshmikar, learned counsel for the petitioners submitted that the cause in the Writ Petition does not survive and has become infructuous.
2. Recording the said submission, 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 closed.
_____________________________
JUSTICE RAVI CHEEMALAPATI
Date: 6th October, 2026
TM
THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE RAVI CHEEMALAPATI
WRIT PETITION NO: 11694 OF 2026
Date: 6th October, 2026
TM