Andhra Pradesh High Court
WP/30050/2025 of Karla Sarath Kumar Vs The State of Andhra Pradesh, on 16 June 2026
HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) [3396] WEDNESDAY, THE SEVENTEENTH DAY OF JUNE TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY SIX PRESENT THE HONOURABLE DR JUSTICE VENKATA JYOTHIRMAI PRATAPA WRIT PETITION NO: 30050/2025 Between: 1. KARLA SARATH KUMAR, , S/O. LATE BERNARD, AGED
APHC010576022025
IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH
AT AMARAVATI
(Special Original Jurisdiction)
WEDNESDAY, THE SEVENTEENTH DAY OF JUNE
TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY SIX
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE DR JUSTICE VENKATA JYOTHIRMAI PRATAPA
WRIT PETITION NO: 30050/2025
Between:
1. KARLA SARATH KUMAR, , S/O. LATE BERNARD, AGED ABOUT 38
YEARS, OCC- AGRICULTURIST AND SOCIAL WORKER R/O. S.C.
COLONY, SIDHARDHA NAGAR VILLAGE, NUZVID MANDAL, ELURU
DISTRICT, ANDHRA PRADESH.
...PETITIONER
AND
1. THE STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH, REP. BY ITS PRINCIPAL
SECRETARY,
REVENUE
DEPARTMENT,
SECRETARIATE
BUILDINGS VELAGAPUDI, AMARAVATI.
2. THE DISTRICT COLLECTOR, ELURU DISTRICT.
3. THE SUBCOLLECTOR, NUZVID, ELURU DISTRICT.
4. THE TAHSILDAR, MANDAL REVENUE OFFICE, NUZVID MANDAL, ELURU DISTRICT.
5. THE FOREST RANGE OFFICER FRO, NUZVID RANGE, ELURU
DISTRICT.
6. THE STATION HOUSE OFFICER, NIZVID RURAL POLICE STATION, NIZVID.
7. BANAVATH MAHESH NAIK, S/O. BALAJI, R/O. SIDHARDHA NAGAR
VILLAGE NUZVID MANDAL, ELURU DISTRICT.
8. BANAVATH MAHINDRA NAIK, S/O. BALAJI, R/O. SIDHARDHA
~ 2 ~
NAGAR VILLAGE, NUZVID MANDAL, ELURU DISTRICT.
9. SMT BANAVATH DEVI, W/O. BALAJI R/O. SIDHARDHA NAGAR
VILLAGE, NUZVID MANDAL, ELURU DISTRICT.
...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 to issue an appropriate writ, order or direction more particularly one in the nature of Writ of Mandamus, declaring the inaction of Respondent Nos.1 to 6 in not preventing and removing the illegal and unauthorized encroachment and concrete construction being carried out by private Respondent Nos. 7 to 9 in the forest land adjoining the main road of S.C.
Colony, Sidhardha Nagar Village, Nuzvid Mandal, Eluru District, as arbitrary, illegal, violative of Article 48A and 51A(g) of the Constitution of India, contrary to Section 2 of the Forest (Conservation) Act, 1980, and consequently direct the official respondents to forthwith demolish and remove such illegal structures and restore the encroached forest land to its original condition, in the interest of justice, and pass Counsel for the Petitioner:
1. B ASHOK KUMAR
Counsel for the Respondent(S):
1. GP FOR HOME
2. GP FOR REVENUE
3. GP FOR FORESTS
~ 3 ~
WRIT PETITION NO: 30050 of 2025
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:-
Despite the matter being listed under the caption “for dismissal” today, there is no representation on behalf of the petitioner. As can be seen from the record, on 16.06.2026 also, there is no representation on behalf of the petitioner.
2. The present Writ Petition has been filed by the petitioner challenging the inaction of the respondent-authorities in not preventing and removing the illegal and unauthorized encroachment and concrete construction being carried out by private Respondent Nos. 7 to 9 in the forest land adjoining the main road of S.C. Colony, Siddhartha Nagar Village, Nuzvid Mandal, Eluru District.
3. Ms. Baliboyina Sravani, learned Assistant Government Pleader for Forests would submit that the petitioner as well as the unofficial respondent Nos.7 to 9 are all encroachers and that the petitioner has filed the present petition by suppressing the material facts. She would further submit that the respondent-authorities have initiated steps for removal of encroachments from the subject property. Learned Assistant Government Pleader would further submit that a case has also been registered against the respondent No.9.
4. In view of the above said facts and circumstances, the Writ Petition is dismissed for non prosecution. There shall be no order as to costs.
~ 4 ~
As a sequel thereto, miscellaneous petitions, if any, pending shall stand closed.
_________________________________________ Dr. JUSTICE VENKATA JYOTHIRMAI PRATAPA Date: 17.06.2026. UPS
~ 5 ~
WRIT PETITION NO: 30050 of 2025
Dt.17.06.2026
UPS