Andhra Pradesh High Court
WP/3559/2019 of G SRINIVASA RAO Vs THE STAET OF AP on 5 April 2026
HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) [3459] MONDAY, THE SIXTH DAY OF APRIL TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY SIX PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SMT JUSTICE SUMATHI JAGADAM WRIT PETITION NO: 3559/2019 Between: 1. G SRINIVASA RAO, S/O. ANJANEYULU, AGED ABOUT 51 YEARS, OCC-
APHC010080872019
IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH
AT AMARAVATI
(Special Original Jurisdiction)
MONDAY,THE SIXTH DAY OF APRIL
TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY SIX
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE SMT JUSTICE SUMATHI JAGADAM
WRIT PETITION NO: 3559/2019
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. G SRINIVASA RAO, S/O. ANJANEYULU, AGED ABOUT 51 YEARS, OCC- AGRICULTURE, R/O DOOR NO.2-152, KORRAPADU VILLAGE, MEDIKONDURU MANDAL, GUNTUR DISTRICT.
...PETITIONER AND
1. THE STAET OF AP, REP., BY ITS PRINCIPAL SECRETARY, REVENUE DEPARTMENT, SECRETARIAT BUILDINGS, VELAGAPUDI, AMARAVATHI GUNTUR DISTRICT.
2. THE DISTRICT COLLECTOR, GUNTUR DISTRICT, GUNTUR.
3. THE TAHSILDAR, MEDIKONDURU MANDAL, GUNTUR DISTRICT.
4. K SAMBASIVA RAO, TAHSILDAR, MEDIKONDURU MANDAL, GUNTUR DISTRICT.
5. THE DEPUTY DIRECTOR, GROUND WATER DEPARTMENT, GUNTUR.
6. KOKKERA VENKAIAH, S/O. YELLAIAH, AGED ABOUT 55 YEARS, OCC- AGRICULTURE, R/O.KORRAPADU VILLAGE, MEDIKONDURU MANDAL, GUNTUR DISTRICT.
7. KOKKERA VENKATESWARLU, S/O. YELLAIAH, AGED ABOUT 51 YEARS, OCC- AGRICULTURE, MEDIKONDURU MANDAL, GUNTUR DISTRICT.
8. KOKKERA SUBBA RAO, S/O.YELLAIAH, AGED ABOUT 45 YEARS, OCC- AGRICULURE, RIO. KORRAPADU VILLAGE, MEDIKONDURU MANDAL, GUNTUR 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 topleased to issue an appropriate Writ, order or direction more particularly one in the nature of Writ of Mandamus declaring the aggrieved by the inaction on the part of the respondents No.2 in considering my representation, dated 30-01-2019 as arbitrary, illegal, violative of fundamental rights guaranteed to me under Articles, 14, 19 and 21 of the Constitution of India and consequently direct the respondents No.2 to consider the representation, dated 30-01-2019 and take appropriate action on the same 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 pleased to direct the respondents No.2 to consider the representation, dated 30-01-2019 submitted by me and take appropriate action on the same pending disposal of the above Writ Petition Counsel for the Petitioner:
1. P V N KIRAN KUMAR Counsel for the Respondent(S):
1. GP FOR REVENUE (AP)
2. GP FOR IRRI AND CAD (AP)
The Court made the following ORDER:
Sri.B.Siva Ram Krishna, learned counsel representing learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the cause in the writ petition does not survive for adjudication.
Since the cause in the Writ Petition does not survive for adjudication, the Writ Petition is dismissed as infructuous. No order as to costs.
As a sequel, miscellaneous applications pending, if any, shall stand closed. __________________________ JUSTICE SUMATHI JAGADAM Date: 06.04.2026 rsd
THE HONOURABLE SMT JUSTICE SUMATHI JAGADAM
WRIT PETITION NO: 3559/2019
Date: 06.04.2026 rsd