Andhra Pradesh High Court
WP/10073/2017 of Panyam Sunki Reddy, Vs State of Andhra Pradesh, on 22 June 2026
IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH (Special Original Jurisdiction) TUESDAY, THE TWENTY THIRD DAY OF JUNE TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY SIX THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE NINALA JAYASURYA WRIT PETITION No: 10073 of Between: 1. PANYAM SUNKI REDDY, S/o.P. RAMI REDDY, AGED 62 YEARS, OCC: CULTIVATION,
APHC010194582017
IN THE H
(
TUESDAY, T
TWO T
THE HONOURAB
WRIT
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. PANYAM SUNKI RE OCC: CULTIVATION, KURNOOL DISTRICT
1. STATE OF ANDHRA ITS PRL. SECRETAR DISTRICT.
2. THE DISTRICT COLL
3. THE REVENUE DIV AND DIST.,
4. THE TAHSILDAR, MID
Counsel for the Petitioner
1. Mr.BUDIGE RANGAS Counsel for the Responde
1. GP FOR ASSIGNMEN
2. GP FOR REVENUE (A
HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) THE TWENTY THIRD DAY OF JUNE THOUSAND AND TWENTY SIX PRESENT BLE SRI JUSTICE NINALA JAYASURY PETITION No: 10073 of 2017 DDY, S/o.P. RAMI REDDY, AGED 62 R/O. DEVANUR VILLAGE, MIDTHUR T. A.P. ...PE AND PRADESH, REVENUE DEPARTMENT RY TO GOVERNMENT, VELAGAPUDI, ECTOR, KURNOOL DISTRICT, KURNO VISIONAL OFFICER, KURNOOL SUB DTHUR MANDAL, KURNOOL DISTRICT ...RESPON r: WAMY ent(S): NT (AP) AP)
YA 2 YEARS, MANDAL, TITIONER T, REP:BY GUNTUR OOL. BDIVISION T. NDENT(S):
The Court made the following Order:
The Writ Petition is filed inter alia on the premise that the documents sought for by the petitioner which are essential to determine W.P.No.36337 of 2015 have not been furnished despite an application / representation under the Right to Information Act. On verification of the Case Status, W.P.No.36337 of 2015 was dismissed vide Order dated 02.05.2022. Be that as it may. Though the matter is listed under the caption ‘for dismissal’, there is no representation on behalf of the petitioner.
In view of the same, the writ petition is dismissed for non-prosecution. No costs. Consequently, all pending applications, if any, shall stand closed. ___________________________ JUSTICE NINALA JAYASURYA
Dt. 23.06.2026 BLV
THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE NINALA JAYASURYA
Writ Petition No: 10073 of 2017 Date: 23.06.2026 BLV