Andhra Pradesh High Court
WP/7969/2015 of Pulavarti Tejo Vs The State of Andhra Pradesh, Rep. by its Principle Secretary on 29 January 2026
HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) [3207] FRIDAY, THE THIRTIETH DAY OF JANUARY TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY SIX PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE BATTU DEVANAND WRIT PETITION NO: 7969/2015 Between: 1.PULAVARTI TEJO, UDAYABHASKAR, S/O.VENKATA SUBBA RAO, AGED 51
APHC010147252015
IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA
PRADESH
AT AMARAVATI
(Special Original Jurisdiction)
FRIDAY,THE THIRTIETH DAY OF JANUARY
TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY SIX
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE BATTU DEVANAND
WRIT PETITION NO: 7969/2015
Between:
1.PULAVARTI
TEJO,
UDAYABHASKAR,
S/O.VENKATA
SUBBA RAO, AGED 51 YEARS, R/O.13-69, AKIVIDU
VILLAGE & MANDAL
...PETITIONER
AND
1. THE
STATE
OF
ANDHRA
PRADESH
REP
BY
ITS
PRINCIPLE
SECRETARY,
HOME
DEPARTMENT,
SECRETARIAT BUILDINGS, HYDERABAD.
2. THE SUPERINTENDENT OF POLICE WEST GODAVARI
DIST ELURU, -
3. THE
STATION
HOUSE
OFFICER
AKIVIDU
POLICE
STATION, AKIVIDU, WEST GODAVARI DISTRICT.
4. THE
SUBREGISTRAR,
O/O.
THE
SUB
REGISTRAR
OFFICE, AKIVIDU, WEST GODAVARI DISTRICT.
5. PONNAMANDA
VENKATA
NARAYANA,
S/O.
LATE
VENKATESWARIU, AGED 63 YEARS, DOOR NO.16-4/1, JAMMUVARI STREET, AKIVIDU VILLAGE & MANDAL, W.G. DISTRICT.
DEV,J
W.P.NO.7969 OF 2015
6. PONNAMANDA
VENKATA
KALYAN,
S/O.
VENKATA
NARAYANA,
AGED
YEARS,
DOOR
NO.16-4/1,
JAMMUVARI STREET, AKIVIDU VILLAGE & MANDAL, W.G. DISTRICT.
7. KATTA GANGA RAJU, S/O. LATE BULLI SWAMY, AGED
63 YEARS, DOOR NO.16-29, MATTAVARI STREET, AKIVUDU VILLAGE, W.G. DISTRICT.
8. KATTA YESUBABU, S/O. GANGA RAJU, 29 YEARS
DOOR
NO.16-29,
MATTAVARI
STREET,
AKIVUDU
VILLAGE, W.G. DISTRICT.
9. KATTA BULLI SWAMY, S/O. GANGA RAJU, AGED 37
YEARS,
DOOR
NO.16-29,
MATTAVARI
STREET,
AKIVUDU VILLAGE, W.G. DISTRICT.
10.ANKANI
DURGA
LAKSHMI,
W/O.VENKATESWARLU,
AGED
YEARS,
DOOR
NO.30/767-116,
VULLINGIPALEM,
MACHALIPATNAM
MANDAL,
KRISHNA DISTRICT
11.KOKKIRAGADDA
SATYAVATHI,
W/O.
NAGARAJU,
AGED 29 YEARS, H. NO.30-795-6, VULLINGIPALEM, MACHALIPATNAM MANDAL, KRISHNA DISTRICT.
12.TAMMU SUNITA, W/O. SURESH, AGED 24 YEARS, H.
NO.30-795-6,
VULLINGIPALEM,
MACHALIPATNAM
MANDAL, KRISHNA 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 toIssue order or orders, direction or directions, Writ or Writs particularly one in the nature of Writ of Mandamus and declare the action of the official respondents is not taking any action on the complaint of the petitioner filed on 21-02-2015 is illegal, arbitrary and violative of Article 14, 21 and
DEV,J
A
of
the
Constitution
of
India,
consequently
direct
respondents to initiated appropriate (Criminal ) legal action against the res. No.4 to 12 basing on the complaint of the petitioner dtd.21-02-2015 and to pass IA NO: 1 OF 2015(WPMP 10520 OF 2015
Petition
under
Section
CPC
praying
that
in
the
circumstances stated in the affidavit filed in support of the petition, the High Court may be pleased direct the 3rd respondent to register the FIR against 4th to 12 respondents and investigate in to the matter pending disposal of the main WP No.
of 2015
and to pass
Counsel for the Petitioner:
1.K L N SWAMY
Counsel for the Respondent(S):
1.GP FOR HOME (AP)
The Court made the following:
DEV,J
W.P.NO.7969 OF 2015
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
Smt.Indu, learned counsel representing Mr.K.L.N Swamy, learned counsel for the petitioner on record represents that this matter has become infructuous.
2. In view of the subsequent developments happened during the pendency of this Writ Petition, the statement of the learned counsel is placed on record.
3. Accordingly, the writ petition is dismissed as infructuous. There shall be no order as to costs.
Miscellaneous petitions pending, if any, in this case shall stand closed. __________________________ JUSTICE BATTU DEVANAND 30.01.2026 LSP
DEV,J