Andhra Pradesh High Court
WP/20633/2011 of SRI M. TIRUPATHI RAO, KAKINADA - 3, E.G. DISTRICT. Vs THE DISCIPLINARY AUTHY.CUM THE PRL.DIST.JUDGE,E.G.DIST.,&ANR on 16 August 2026
HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) [3543] MONDAY, THE 17th DAY OF AUGUST 2026 PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE NINALA JAYASURYA THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE T.C.D.SEKHAR WRIT PETITION NO: 20633/2011 Between: 1. SRI M. TIRUPATHI RAO, KAKINADA - 3, E.G.
APHC010026932011
IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH
AT AMARAVATI
(Special Original Jurisdiction)
MONDAY, THE 17th DAY OF AUGUST 2026
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE NINALA JAYASURYA
THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE T.C.D.SEKHAR
WRIT PETITION NO: 20633/2011
Between:
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.
1. SRI M. TIRUPATHI RAO, KAKINADA - 3, E.G. DISTRICT., S/O. LATE BHEEMA RAJU R/O. D.NO. 68-7-5, SRI SHIRIDI SAI NILAYAM, ZATLA PEDAKAPU STREET, OPP. GOKULAM, ASHOK NAGAR, KAKINADA - 3, EAST GODAVARI DISTRICT.
...PETITIONER AND
1. THE DISCIPLINARY AUTHY CUM THE PRL DIST JUDGE E G DIST ANR, THE PRINCIPAL DISTRICT JUDGE EAST GODAVARI DISTRICT, AT RAJAHMUNDRY.
2. THE ENQUIRY OFFICER CUM II ADDL DISTRICT JUDGE, AT AMALAPURAM, EAST GODAVARI DISTRICT.
...RESPONDENT(S): Counsel for the Petitioner:
1. N (P) ANJANA DEVI SATYANARAYANA Counsel for the Respondent(S):
1. A JAYANTHI
NJS,J & TCDS,J W.P No.20633 of 2011
THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE NINALA JAYASURYA THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE T.C.D.SEKHAR Writ Petition No:20633 of 2011 The Court made the following Order: (per Sri Justice Ninala Jayasurya)
As it was noted that learned counsel representing the petitioner expired, notice was directed through the Registry, the same was returned with an endorsement “no such person”.
2. In view of the same, Writ Petition is dismissed for non-prosecution. However, the petitioner may seek revival of the writ petition, if he is so advised to contest the matter on merits. No costs. Miscellaneous petitions pending, if any, shall stand closed. __________________________ JUSTICE NINALA JAYASURYA
_____________________ JUSTICE T.C.D.SEKHAR Date:17.08.2026 Ksj