Andhra Pradesh High Court
WP/20240/2019 of Pasupuleti Nageswara Rao Vs The State of Andhra Pradesh on 8 April 2026
HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) [3459] THURSDAY, THE NINTH DAY OF APRIL TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY SIX PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SMT JUSTICE SUMATHI JAGADAM WRIT PETITION NO: 20240/2019 Between: 1. PASUPULETI NAGESWARA RAO, S/O.SATYANARAYANA, AGED ABOUT 44
APHC010420702019
IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH
AT AMARAVATI
(Special Original Jurisdiction)
THURSDAY,THE NINTH DAY OF APRIL
TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY SIX
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE SMT JUSTICE SUMATHI JAGADAM
WRIT PETITION NO: 20240/2019
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. PASUPULETI NAGESWARA RAO, S/O.SATYANARAYANA, AGED ABOUT 44 YEARS, R/O.D.NO.17-85, BEHIND POCHAMMA GUDI, UNDRAJAVARAM VILLAGE AND MANDAL, WEST GODAVARI DISTRICT. AADHAAR NO.4057 7773 5482.
...PETITIONER AND
1. THE STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH, THROUGH ITS PRINCIPAL SECRETARY DEPARTMENT OF REVENUE
SECRETARIAT, VELAGAPUDI, AMARAVATHI GUNTUR DISTRICT.
2. THE CHAIRMAN, MAINTENANCE AND WELFARE OF PARENTS AND SENIOR CITIZENS TRIBUNAL -CUM REVENUE DIVISIONAL OFFICER, KOVVUR. WEST GODAVARI DISTRICT.
3. PASUPULETI SATYANARAYANA, S/O.LATE NARASANNA, AGED MAJOR, R/O. UNDRAJAVARAM VILLAGE AND MANDAL, WEST GODAVARI DISTRICT.
4. PASUPULETI PRABHAVATHI, W/O.P.SATYANARAYANA, AGED MAJOR, R/O. UNDRAJAVARAM VILLAGE AND MANDAL, WEST GODAVARI DISTRICT.
5. THE TAHSILDAR, UNDRAJAVARAM MANDAL, UNDRAJAVARAM, WEST GODAVARI 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 toto issue an appropriate writ order or direction more particularly in the nature of Writ of Mandamus declaring the order dated 26-10-2019 in case No.5 of 2019 passed by the 2nd respondent, as arbitrary, illegal, capricious and violative of principles of natural justice apart from provisions of Act 56/2007 and the rules 2011 made there under and consequently set aside the same and pass IA NO: 1 OF 2019 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 to suspend the operation of order dated 26-10-2019 in case No.5 of 2019 passed by the 2nd respondent herein pending disposal of the writ petition and pass Counsel for the Petitioner:
1. SAI GANGADHAR CHAMARTY Counsel for the Respondent(S):
1. KANUKOLANU SRI SAI SANJAY
2. GP FOR REVENUE (AP)
The Court made the following ORDER:
Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that he addressed a letter to the Registry on 07.04.2026 seeking permission of this Court to withdraw the Writ Petition.
Permission is accorded.
Accordingly, the Writ Petition is dismissed as withdrawn. There shall be no order as to costs.
As a sequel, miscellaneous applications pending, if any, shall stand closed.
_________________________________ JUSTICE SUMATHI JAGADAM Dated: 09.04.2026
RSD
THE HONOURABLE SMT JUSTICE SUMATHI JAGADAM
WRIT PETITION NO: 20240/2019
Dated: 09.04.2026 RSD