Andhra Pradesh High Court

WP/1258/2023 of R LOKANADHAM Vs THE STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH on 14 July 2026

Cites 0, Cited by 0

for orders : Date of pronouncement : 15.07.2026 Date of uploading : APHC010024182023 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) [3332] WEDNESDAY, THE 15th DAY OF JULY 2026 PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE RAVI CHEEMALAPATI WRIT PETITION NO: 1258/2023

Date of reserved for orders :

Date of pronouncement : 15.07.2026

Date of uploading :

APHC010024182023

IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH

AT AMARAVATI

(Special Original Jurisdiction)

WEDNESDAY, THE 15th DAY OF JULY 2026

PRESENT

THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE RAVI CHEEMALAPATI

WRIT PETITION NO: 1258/2023

Between:

Citations and Judicial Treatment

No citing decisions in the index yet

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…

1. R LOKANADHAM, S/O PAPAIAH NAIDU, AGED 59 YEARS, RIO. D.NO. 1-2, ANANTHAPURAM VILLAGE,

BAKARA NARASINGARAYUNIPETA POST, CHITTOOR MANDAL, CHITTOOR DISTRICT.

2. NAVANEETHAMMA, W/O ANANDAN, WARD NO. AGED 51 YEARS, OCC. 5TH WARD MEMBER, RIO. D.NO. 2-122, ALUKURUPALLE, ANANTHAPURAM VILLAGE, BAKARA NARASINGARAYUNIPETA POST, CHITTOOR MANDAL, CHITTOOR DISTRICT.

3. M.KAMALAMMA, W/O NAGANNATHA NAIDU, AGED 62 YEARS, OCC. 7TH WARD MEMBER, R/O. D.NO. 4-35, S.THANGAL, ANANTHAPURAM VILLAGE, BAKARA NARASINGARAYUNIPETA POST, CHITTOOR MANDAL, CHITTOOR DISTRICT.

4. R.ROSAIAH, S/O CHINNABBA NAIDU,

AGED

YEARS, R/O.ANANTHAPURAM VILLAGE,

BAKARA NARASINGARAYUNIPETA POST, CHITTOOR MANDAL, CHITTOOR DISTRICT.

5. V.SUBRAMANYAM NAIDU, S/O LATE DHANANJAYALU NAIDU, AGED 53 YEARS, R/O. D.NO, 1-44, ANANTHAPURAM VILLAGE, BAKARA NARASINGARAYUNIPETA POST, CHITTOOR MANDAL, CHITTOOR DISTRICT.

...PETITIONER(S)

AND

1. THE STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH, REP. BY ITS PRINCIPAL SECRETARY, R-)PPRI-PNPNT OF SECRETARIAT BUILDINGS, VELAGAPUDI, GUNTUR DIST.

2. THE DISTRICT COLLECTOR, CHITTOOR DISTRICT AT CHITTOOR, ANDHRA PRADESH.

3. THE TAHSILDAR, CHITTOOR MANDAL AT CHITTOOR, CHITTOOR DISTRICT, ANDHRA PRADESH.

...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 tomay be pleased to issue a writ, order or a direction, more particularly one in the nature of WRIT OF MANDAMUS declaring the action of the 3rd Respondent in issuing a letter vide Roc.No. A 2022, Dt..10.2022 to the Extension Officer of Panchayat Raj and Rural Development Chittoor Mandal and Panchayat Secretary, Ananthapuram Gram Panchayat, Chittoor District trying to change the classification of land as Bandi Daari to Assessed Waste Dry for construction of Rythu Barosa Kendram at B.N.R.Peta, Chittoor as per the resolution of Gram Panchayat as illegal, arbitrary, contrary to law, against the Board Standing Orders, against the principles of natural justice, unconstitutional, without jurisdiction, by depriving rights and in violation of provisions of Andhra Pradesh Panchayat RajAct, 1994 and consequently set aside the impugned letter vide Roc.No. A/ / 2022, Dt.10.2022 passed by the 3rd Respondent arbitrarily without application of mind and to pass such IA NO: 1 OF 2023 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 may be pleased to direct the respondent's not to interfere and not to ICI IyG LI IG I ICILUI of land (Classified as Bandi Dari) for an extent of Ac.1.50 cents situated in Sy.No.145/5 of Ananthapuram Revenue Village, Chittoor Mandal and District pending disposal of the writ petition pending disposal of the above writ petition and to pass such 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 May be pleased to grant leave to the Respondent No.3 in the Writ Petition No.1258 of 2023 to file counter affidavit in the above Writ Petition and pass Counsel for the Petitioner(S):

1. M LAKSHMI NARAYANA Counsel for the Respondent(S):

1. GP FOR REVENUE The Court made the following order:

Sri B.Chandrasekhar, learned counsel representing learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the writ petition became infructuous and hence prayed to dismiss the writ petition.

2. Recording the same, this writ petition is dismissed as infructuous. There shall be no order as to costs.

Pending miscellaneous petitions, if any, shall stand closed.

________________________ JUSTICE RAVI CHEEMALAPATI 15.07.2026 BRS

You have used today's free searches. Sign in, for free, to keep searching without a limit.

Compass reads the judgments for you and finds the paragraphs for and against your question. Sign in to use it.

My Vault follows judgments for you and records every later decision that cites them. Sign in to keep one.

Sign in to download the court's PDF. The full text stays free to read here.

Sign in, for free, to download the court copy. Reading the full text here stays open to everyone.

Search and read Indian judgments without limits, save them to My Vault and find the relevant paragraphs with Compass.

Open the sign-in page instead