Andhra Pradesh High Court
WP/3460/2018 of s.mohammad ali Vs The State of Andhra Pradesh on 3 February 2026
HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) [3459] WEDNESDAY, THE FOURTH DAY OF FEBRUARY TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY SIX PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SMT JUSTICE SUMATHI JAGADAM WRIT PETITION NO: 3460/2018 Between: 1. S.MOHAMMAD ALI, S/O LATE BABA SAHEB, AGED ABOUT 33 YEARS,
APHC010075512018
IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH
AT AMARAVATI
(Special Original Jurisdiction)
WEDNESDAY, THE FOURTH DAY OF FEBRUARY
TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY SIX
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE SMT JUSTICE SUMATHI JAGADAM
WRIT PETITION NO: 3460/2018
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. S.MOHAMMAD ALI, S/O LATE BABA SAHEB, AGED ABOUT 33 YEARS, OCC CULTIVATION, R/O THEENHAM VILLAGE, BAIREDDIPALLI MANDAL, CHITTOOR DISTRICT
...PETITIONER AND
1. THE STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH, REP. BY IS PRINCIPAL SECRETARY, REVENUE 'DEPARTMENT, SECRETARIAT, HYDERABAD.
2. THE SUBCOLLECTOR, MADANAPALLE CHITTOOR DISTRICT.
3. THE TAHSILDAR BAIREDDIPALLE MANDAL, CHITTOOR DISTRICT.
4. G RANGAIAH SETTY, S/O LATE GANDLA SUBRAMANYAM SETTY, AGED ABOUT
YEARS R/O THEERTHAM VILLAGE BAIREDDIPALLI MANDAL, CHITTOOR 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 inaction of the respondent No. 3 herein in conducting enquiry pursuant to the letter issued by the 2nd respondent dt. 19/12/2014 bearing L.Dis. (B4)/5803/2014 inspite of the repeated visits made by the petitioner, as being illegal, arbitrary and unjust and consequently direct the 3rd respondent to conduct enquiry in compliance of the directions of the 2nd respondent and to forthwith submit his report, and to grant 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 3rd respondent herein not to issue pattadar passbook and title deed in favour of the 4th respondent in respect of the lands in S.Nos. 918/1 and 946/2 admeasuring Ac. 1.50 cents and Ac. 1.39 cents situated at Theertham village, Baireddipalli Mandal, Chitoor District, pending disposal of the main Writ Petition, and to pass Counsel for the Petitioner:
1. GAJANAND CHAKRAVARTHI Counsel for the Respondent(S):
1. GP FOR REVENUE (AP)
The Court made the following ORDER:
No representation for the petitioner.
Learned Assistant Government Pleader for Revenue, on instructions, submits that the petitioner’s wife filed W.P.No.6343 of 2014 questioning the mutation proceedings and the said writ petition was dismissed on 11.03.2014 with liberty to approach competent civil Court. Thereafter, O.S.No.110 of 2014 was filed and the same was dismissed on 19.09.2014. Aggrieved by the same, C.M.A.No.10 of 2014 was preferred which was also dismissed by confirming the order passed in O.S.No.110 of 2014.
Since the cause in the writ petition does not survive for consideration, the Writ Petition is dismissed as infructuous. There shall be no order as to costs.
As a sequel, miscellaneous applications pending, if any, shall stand closed.
__________________________________ JUSTICE SUMATHI JAGADAM Dated: 04.02.2026 KAS
THE HONOURABLE SMT JUSTICE SUMATHI JAGADAM
WRIT PETITION NO: 3460/2018
Dated: 04.02.2026 KAS