Andhra Pradesh High Court
WP/34292/2018 of Boyapati Srinivas Rao Vs The State of Andhra Pradesh on 16 February 2026
HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH :: AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) TUESDAY, THE SEVENTEENTH DAY OF FEBRUARY TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY SIX [3459] PRESENT THE HON'BLE SMT. JUSTICE SUMATHI JAGADAM WRIT PETITION No.34292 OF 2018 Between: Boyapati Srinivas Rao. --- Petitioner and The State of
APHC010711252018
IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH ::
AMARAVATI
(Special Original Jurisdiction)
TUESDAY, THE SEVENTEENTH DAY OF FEBRUARY
TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY SIX
PRESENT
THE HON'BLE SMT. JUSTICE SUMATHI JAGADAM
WRIT PETITION No.34292 OF 2018
Between:
Boyapati Srinivas Rao.
---
Petitioner
and
The State of Andhra Pradesh,
Rep. by its Principal Secretary,
Department of Revenue, A.P. Secretariat, Velagapudi, Amaravathi, Guntur and 3 others.
---
Respondents
Counsel for the petitioner
:
Smt. A. Varalakshmi
Counsel for the respondents
:
G.P. for Revenue
The Court made the following
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:
Heard the arguments of learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned Assistant Government Pleader for Revenue and perused the material available on record.
2. From a perusal of the record, it appears that pursuant to the application of the petitioner, dated 18.08.2018, the fourth respondent issued an Endorsement vide Rc.A124/2010, dated 16.08.2010, to the petitioner. This endorsement directed him to furnish an amended registered document for an extent of Ac.2.98 cents in R.S. No.146/5 of Kothagudem Village, obtained from his family members i.e., mother, brother and sisters in support of codicil, executed by his father.
3. It is observed that the petitioner has approached this Court without challenging the said endorsement, the Writ Petition is not maintainable, due to his failure to challenge the foundational order, and is consequently liable to be dismissed.
4. Accordingly, with the above observation, the Writ Petition is dismissed. No order as to costs.
Consequently, Miscellaneous Applications pending, if any, shall stand dismissed.
__________________________ JUSTICE SUMATHI JAGADAM Date:17.02.2026 DSH