Andhra Pradesh High Court
WP/35601/2018 of Ch.V.Satyanarayana Reddy Vs The State of Andhra Pradesh on 9 February 2026
HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) [3459] TUESDAY, THE TENTH DAY OF FEBRUARY TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY SIX PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SMT JUSTICE SUMATHI JAGADAM WRIT PETITION NO: 35601/2018 Between: 1. CH.V.SATYANARAYANA REDDY, S/O.RAMI REDDY, AGED ABOUT 32 YEARS,
APHC010738172018
IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH
AT AMARAVATI
(Special Original Jurisdiction)
TUESDAY,THE TENTH DAY OF FEBRUARY
TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY SIX
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE SMT JUSTICE SUMATHI JAGADAM
WRIT PETITION NO: 35601/2018
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. CH.V.SATYANARAYANA REDDY, S/O.RAMI REDDY, AGED ABOUT 32 YEARS, OCC.CULTIVATION, R/O.FLAT NO.28, VENNELA HOSPITAL ROAD, PATAMATA, VIJAYAWADA (URBAN), KRISHNA DISTRICT.
...PETITIONER AND
1. THE STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH, REP. BY ITS PRINCIPAL SECRETARY, REVENUE DEPT., SECRETARIAT, AMARAVATHI, VELAGAPUDI GUNTURU DISTRICT, ANDHRA PRADESH.
2. THE DISTRICT COLLECTOR, PRAKASM, PRAKASAMDISTRICT.,
3. THE REVENUE DIVISIONAL OFFICER, ADDANKI, ADDANKI MANDAL, PRAKASAM DISTRICT.
4. THE THASILDAR, ADDANKI, ADDANKI MANDAL, PRAKASAM DISTRICT.
5. JKBSH SADANA SAMITHI, REP. BY ITS MANAGER, SRINIVAS, O/O.3-4-376, NEAR VTV AYURVEDIC CENTER, BASANTH NAGAR COLONY, KACHIGUDA, HYDERABAD.
...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 in the nature of
JS, J W.P.No.35601/2018
Writ of Mandamus declaring the action of the Respondent Nos.2 to 4 in not taking any action on the Representation dt.26-09-2018 made by the petitioner as highly illegal, arbitrary and against natural justice and also violative of Art.14, 21 of Constitution of India and consequently direct the Respondent Nos.2 to 4 to consider the petitioners representation dt.26.09.2018 and take action against the 5th respondent for taking the agreement dt.06-09-2018 illegally from the petitioner for Tulasi (Basil) Cultivation as per the petitioner Representation dt.26-09-2018 and 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 direct the Respondent Nos.2 to 4 to consider and take action against the 5th respondent for take the agreement dt.06-09-2018 illegally from the petitioner for Tulasi (Basi) Cultivation as per the petitioner Representation dt.26- 09- 2018 pending disposal of the above writ petition and pass Counsel for the Petitioner:
1. T G PRASAD REDDY Counsel for the Respondent(S):
1. GP FOR REVENUE (AP)
JS, J W.P.No.35601/2018
The Court made the following ORDER:
Learned counsel for the petitioner appearing through online 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: 10.02.2026 rsd
JS, J
THE HONOURABLE SMT JUSTICE SUMATHI JAGADAM
WRIT PETITION NO: 35601/2018
Date: 10.02.2026 rsd