Andhra Pradesh High Court
WP/24630/2018 of Sri Kalidindi Ananda Raju Vs The State of Andhra Pradesh, on 2 March 2026
HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) [3459] TUESDAY, THE THIRD DAY OF MARCH TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY SIX PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SMT JUSTICE SUMATHI JAGADAM WRIT PETITION NO: 24630/2018 Between: 1. SRI KALIDINDI ANANDA RAJU, S/O SUBBA RAJU, AGE 40 YEARS, OCC.
APHC010522782018
IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH
AT AMARAVATI
(Special Original Jurisdiction)
TUESDAY,THE THIRD DAY OF MARCH
TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY SIX
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE SMT JUSTICE SUMATHI JAGADAM
WRIT PETITION NO: 24630/2018
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. SRI KALIDINDI ANANDA RAJU, S/O SUBBA RAJU, AGE 40 YEARS, OCC. CULTIVATION, RIO SRUNGAVRUKSHAM VILLAGE, PALAKODERU MANDAL, WEST GODAVARI DISTRICT.
...PETITIONER AND
1. THE STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH, REP. BY ITS PRINCIPAL SECRETARY, REVENUE DEPARTMENT, SECRETARIAT BUILDINGS, VELAGAPUDI, AMARAVATHI, GUNTUR DISTRICT.
2. THE DISTRICT COLLECTOR, WEST GODAVARI DISTRICT AT ELURU.
3. THE REVENUE DIVISIONAL OFFICER, NARSAPURAM REVENUE DIVISION, NARSAPURAM, WEST GODAVARI DISTRICT.
4. THE TAHSILDAR, PALAKODERU MANDAL, PALAKODERU, 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 one in the nature of Writ of Mandamus declaring the action of the 4th respodent in issuing the impugned notice vide Rc.No.284/2018 (A), dated 19- 05-2018, as illegal, arbitrary, contrary to law, violation of principles of natural justice and also contrary to the Rules and Regulations contemplated under the
JS, J W.P.No.24630/2018
WALT Act, 2002 and consequently direct the 4th respondent to drop all further proceedings in pursuance to the notice vide Rc.No.284/2018 (A), dated 19-05- 2018, and to pass IA NO: 1 OF 2018 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 stay all further proceedings pursuant to the notice vide Rc.No.284/2018 (A), dated 19-05-2018, including closing of the bore well, pending disposal of writ petition and to pass Counsel for the Petitioner:
1. K V L NARASIMHA RAO Counsel for the Respondent(S):
1. GP FOR REVENUE (AP)
JS, J W.P.No.24630/2018
The Court made the following ORDER:
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: 03.03.2026 rsd
JS, J
THE HONOURABLE SMT JUSTICE SUMATHI JAGADAM
WRIT PETITION NO: 24630/2018
Date: 03.03.2026 rsd