Andhra Pradesh High Court
WP/16345/2023 of SAGI UDAYA BHASKARA RAJU Vs THE STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH on 29 June 2026
reserved for orders : Date of pronouncement : Date of uploading : 0 APHC010319732023 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH TUESDAY, THE 30 THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE RAVI CHEEMALAPATI WRIT PETITION NO: 16345/2023 Between: 1. SAGI UDAYA BHASKARA RAJU, S/O.SUBBA RAJU, AGED ABOUT 60 YEARS, OCC.
Date of reserved for orders
Date of pronouncement
Date of uploading : 0
APHC010319732023
IN TH
TUESD
THE HONOURA
WR
Between:
1. SAGI UDAYA BHA
60 YEARS, OCC. B
GUDIVADA, KRISH
1. THE STATE OF A
SECRETARY, RE
SECRETARIAT, VE
2. THE COMPETENT
KRISHNA DISTRIC
3. THE
DISTRICT
MACHILIPATNAM.
4. THE TAHASILDAR,
5. GOKAVARAPU V
HINDU,
AGED
SATYANARAYANA
s :
: 30.06.2026
02.07.2026
E HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRAD
AT AMARAVATI
(Special Original Jurisdiction)
DAY, THE 30th DAY OF JUNE 2026
PRESENT
ABLE SRI JUSTICE RAVI CHEEMAL
RIT PETITION NO: 16345/2023
ASKARA RAJU, S/O.SUBBA RAJU,
BUSINESS, R/O.D.NO.16/387-2, PAM
HNA DISTRICT.
AND
ANDHRA PRADESH, REP. BY IT
VENUE (LAND ACQUISITION) D
ELAGAPUDI, AMARAVATH, GUNTUR
AUTHORITY LA, NH165 AND JOINT
T, MACHILIPATNAM.
COLLECTOR,
,
KRISHNA
, GUDIVADA, KRISHNA DISTRICT
ENKATA LAKSHMI, W/O.MATURI
D
YEARS,
R/O.D
APURAM, GUDIVADA, KRISHNA DIST
...RES
RC,J
W.P.No.16345 of 2023
DESH
LAPATI
AGED ABOUT
MARRU ROAD,
...PETITIONER
TS PRINCIPAL
DEPARTMENT,
R DISTRICT.
T COLLECTOR,
A
DISTRICT,
I SRINIVASU,
D.NO.15/221-1,
TRICT
SPONDENT(S):
RC,J
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 an appropriate Writ, direction or order, more particularly one in the nature of Writ of Mandamus declaring that the action of the Respondent No.4 in issuing impugned notice in RC.DT/293/2023 dated 01-05-2023 and further threatening to initiate criminal action against me in respect of payment of compensation for acquisition of my land of an extent of 130sq.mts. In a 3G award enquiry and Award NO.03/2023 /NH-165 dated 02- 02-2023 of the respondent No.2, even without considering the objections dated 08- 05-2023 and following the due process of law is arbitrary, illegal, unjust and whimsical and violation of Article 14,19, 21 and 300 A of Constitution of India besides in breach of Statutory provisions of law and in violation of principles of natural justice and consequently direct the respondents 3 and 4 not to take or initiate any coercive steps against me in furtherance of the impugned notice in the interests of justice and pass 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 pleased to stay all further proceedings in pursuance of the impugned notice Rc.DT/293/2023 dated 01-05-2023 issued by thegs respondent including threatened coercive actions against the petitioner in the interest of Justice and pass Counsel for the Petitioner:
1.P A SESHU
Counsel for the Respondent(S):
1.GP FOR LAND ACQUISITION
2.PILLIX LAW FIRM
The Court made the following:
RC,J
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
As there was no representation for petitioner on 28.04.2026, the matter was adjourned to 4.5.2026 to be listed under the caption “for dismissal”. On 04.05.2026, Sri A.Manoj, learned counsel, representing learned counsel or petitioner, sought time on the ground that brother of learned counsel for petitioner had expired and accordingly, the matter was listed today under the same caption “for dismissal”.
2. Despite listing the matter under the caption “for dismissal”, Sri Manoj A., learned counsel, representing Sri Sagi Udaya Bhaskara Raju, learned counsel for the petitioner, appeared in virtual mode and sought time. This shows that the petitioner is not interested to prosecute the matter.
3. In view of the above, the writ petition is dismissed for non prosecution. There shall be no order as to costs.
Consequently, the miscellaneous petitions, if any, pending, shall stand closed.
___________________________ JUSTICE RAVI CHEEMALAPATI 30TH June, 2026
RR Whether the order is : Speaking Yes/No / Reasoned Yes/No Reportable Yes/No / Non-Reportable Yes/No