Andhra Pradesh High Court
WP/23056/2026 of SHAIK MAHABOOB SUBHANI Vs The State of Andhra Pradesh on 12 August 2026
IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) [3457] THURSDAY, THE 13th DAY OF AUGUST 2026 PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE HARINATH.N WRIT PETITION NO: 23056/2026 Between: 1. SHAIK MAHABOOB SUBHANI, S/O. SRI.SBAIK.ADAM SABEB, AGED- 53 YEARS, OCC RMP
APHC010425042026
IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH
AT AMARAVATI
(Special Original Jurisdiction)
THURSDAY, THE 13th DAY OF AUGUST 2026
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE HARINATH.N
WRIT PETITION NO: 23056/2026
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. SHAIK MAHABOOB SUBHANI, S/O. SRI.SBAIK.ADAM SABEB, AGED- 53 YEARS, OCC RMP DOCTOR, R/O.H.NO. 41-1/9-19, GOWTBAMINAGAR, KRISHNA LANKA, VIJAYAWADA-520013.
2. RASAM SETTY.JANARDBAN RAO,, S/O.R.DURGA RAO, AGED 60 YEARS, OCC BUSINESS, R/O.41-1/13-70, GOWTBAMI NAGAR, THIRD LINE, NEAR NAVABHARATHO SCHOOL, KRISHNA LANKA, VIJAYAWADA, PIN 520013.
3. KONDAVEETI. SRINIVASA RAO,, S/O.K. VENKATA NAGESWAR SARMA, AGED 41 YEARS, OCC TAILOR, R/O.41-1/13-70/A, KRISHNA LANKA, VIJAYAWADA, PIN 520013.
...PETITIONER(S) AND
1. THE STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH, REPRESENTED BY ITS PRINCIPAL SECRETARY, MUNCIPAL ADMINISTRATION AND URBAN DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT, SECRETARIAT,VELAGAPUDI, AMARAVATHI, GUNTUR DISTRICT 522238
2. THE VIJAYAWADA MUNICIPAL CORPORATION, VIJAYAWADA, NTR DISTRICT-520001. REP., BY ITS COMMISSIONER.
3. THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONERREVENUE, VIJAYAWADA MUNCIPAL CORPORATION,
CIRCLE-THREEREVENUE, BVR COMPLEX, PATAMATA, VIJAYAWADA-520010.
4. THE REVENUE DIVISIONAL OFFICER, VIJAYAWADA, NTR
DISTRICT-520010EW
...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 toissue a Writ or Direction, one in the nature of MANDUMUS, directing the respondents not to proceed further as per their Notice Vide Rc.A 12- 110926/2026, Dated 27-07-2026, received by the Petitioner on 03-08- 2026, and not to take any coercive steps against the petitioners, including dispossessing the petitioners from their Residential Houses,ie.First Petitioner's House in H.No. 41- 1/9-19, Second Peitioner's House in H.No. 41-1/13-70, Third Petitioner's House in H.No. 41-1/13-70A, located at Gowthaminagar, Krishna Lanka, Vijayawada Krishna District, and their attempts in disconnecting the electricity connection, water supply connection and drainage connection, cancelling the municipal assessment and door number, are illegal, arbitrary, without jurisdiction, violative of the principles of natural justice and Articles 14, 21 and 300-A of the Constitution of India, consequently to Set-aside the Impugned Notice Vide Rc.A 12-110926/2026, Dated 27-07-2026, received by the Petitioner on 03-08-2026, 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 suspend the Impugned Notice Vide Rc.A 12-110926/2026, Dated 27-07- 2026, received by the Petitioner on 03-08-2026, and not to take any coercive steps against the petitioners, including dispossessing the petitioners from their Residential Houses,ie.First Petitioner’s House in -H.No. 41-1/9-19, Second Peitioner’s House in H.No. 41-1/13-70, Third Petitioner’s House in H.No. 41- 1/13-70A, located at Gowthaminagar, Krishna Lanka, Vijayawada Krishna District, consequently not to disconnect the electricity service connection, water supply and drainage connections to the above houses, Counsel for the Petitioner(S):
1. S SATYANARAYANA MOORTHY Counsel for the Respondent(S):
1. GP FOR REVENUE
2. GP MUNCIPAL ADMN AND URBAN DEV AP
The Court made the following Order:
The learned counsel appearing for the petitioners submits that the petitioners are aggrieved by the endorsement dated 27.07.2026, whereby the petitioners are called upon to explain, within a period of seven days, as to why further action in pursuance of the orders of the Court in L.G.O.P.No.80 of 1989 ought not to be complied with. It is also stated in the impugned proceedings that, in the event of failure on the part of the petitioners to submit an explanation, further action would be initiated.
2. Today, when the matter is taken up for hearing, the learned counsel appearing for the petitioners submits that the impugned endorsement was served on 31.07.2026 and that the seven-day period is over today. Liberty is sought to file a reply to the endorsement by way of indulgence of this Court in extending the time.
3. The learned Standing counsel appearing for respondent Nos.2 and 3 submits that the endorsement is also under challenge.
4. Considering the submissions, the present writ petition is disposed of, and the petitioners are at liberty to submit their response/reply to the endorsement dated 27.07.2026, latest by 21.08.2026. Thereafter, the respondents may pass appropriate orders in accordance with law. There shall be no order as to costs.
As a sequel, pending miscellaneous petitions, if any, shall stand closed.
___________________ JUSTICE HARINATH.N Date:13.08.2026 RJS
THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE HARINATH.N
WRIT PETITION NO: 23056 of 2026
Date: 13.08.2026
RJS