Andhra Pradesh High Court
WP/9225/2015 of Yeddula Tulasamma, Vs State of Andhra Pradesh, on 30 October 2025
HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH FRIDAY, THE TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE CHEEKATI MANAVENDRANATH ROY WRIT PETITION Between: 1. YEDDULA TULASAMMA,, W/O SAMBASIVA REDDY, AGED ABOUT 45 YEARS. 2. YEDDULA TIRUPAL REDDY,, S/O SARABHA REDDY, AGED ABOUT 40 YEARS. 3. YEDDULA
APHC010478222015
IN TH
FRIDAY, TH
TWO
THE HONOURABLE SR
W
Between:
1. YEDDULA TULASA
45 YEARS.
2. YEDDULA TIRUPA
40 YEARS.
3. YEDDULA SAMBA
ABOUT 43 YEARS.
4. YEDDULA PRATAP
50 YEARS. ALL A
PAMIDI MANDAL, A
1. STATE
OF
AND
SECRETARY,
R
BUILDINGS, HYDE
2. THE
DISTRICT
ANANTHAPURAM.
3. THE REVENUE DIV
ANANTHAPURAM,
4. THE TAHASILDAR
DISTRICT.
E HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRAD
AT AMARAVATI
(Special Original Jurisdiction)
HE THIRTY FIRST DAY OF OCTOBE
THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE
PRESENT
RI JUSTICE CHEEKATI MANAVEND
RIT PETITION NO: 9225/2015
AMMA,, W/O SAMBASIVA REDDY,
AL REDDY,, S/O SARABHA REDDY,
ASIVA REDDY,, S/O SARABHA R
P REDDY,, S/O SARABHA REDDY,
ARE RESIDENTS OF GAJARAMPA
ANANTHAPURAM DISTRICT.
...P
AND
DHRA
PRADESH,
REP.
BY
ITS
REVENUE
DEPARTMENT,
S
RABAD.
COLLECTOR,
ANANTHAPURAM
VISIONAL OFFICER, ANANTHAPUR
ANANTHAPURAM DISTRICT.
R, PAMIDI MANDAL, PAMIDI, ANA
DESH
ER
DRANATH ROY
AGED ABOUT
AGED ABOUT
REDDY, AGED
AGED ABOUT
ALLI VILLAGE,
PETITIONER(S)
S
PRINCIPAL
SECRETARIAT
M
DISTRICT,
RAM DIVISION,
ANTHAPURAM
CMR,J
W.P.No.9225 of 2015
...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 order, writ or direction more particularly in the nature of writ of Mandamus declaring the action of the 4th respondent and his officials in interfering with the property of the petitioners being an extent of Ac.0.17
cents in Sy.No.266/A2B situate in Gajarampalli Village, Pamidi Mandal, Ananthapuram District, without following due process of law, as illegal, arbitrary, against principles of natural justice, violative of Articles 14 and 300-A
of the Constitution of India and consequently refrain the ,o respondents from interfering with the petitioners property and pass IA NO: 1 OF 2015(WPMP 12155 OF 2015
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 respondents not to interfere with the property of the petitioners being an extent of Ac.0.17 cents in Sy.No.266/A2B situate in Gajarampalli Village, Pamidi Mandal, Ananthapuram District, pending the above writ petition and pass IA NO: 2 OF 2015(WPMP 32538 OF 2015
Petition under Section 151 CPC praying that in the circumstances stated
permit this respondent to implead as 5th respondent as proper necessary party in Writ Petition No.9225 of 2015 as well as WPMPs IA NO: 5 OF 2015(WVMP 139379 OF 2015
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
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 vacate the interim orders granted by this Hon'bile Court in WPMP.No. 12155
of 2015 in writ petition No. 9225 of 2015 and pass
CMR,J
W.P.No.9225 of 2015
IA NO: 1 OF 2024
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
pleased to vacate the interim order passed on 09-11-2022 in WP.No.9225 of 2015 and dismiss the writ petition and pass Counsel for the Petitioner(S):
1.P NARASIMHULU
Counsel for the Respondent(S):
1.GP FOR REVENUE (AP)
2.K SRINIVAS
CMR,J
W.P.No.9225 of 2015
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:
Pursuant to the Memo dated 07.03.2025 filed by learned counsel for the writ petitioners to list the matter to withdraw the same, the matter is listed today under the caption ‘for withdrawal’.
2. Learned counsel for the writ petitioners submits that the parties have settled the matter out of the Court and thereby sought permission to withdraw the writ petition. He has also filed the letter addressed by the writ petitioners to that effect.
3. Permission is accorded.
4. Accordingly, the Writ Petition is dismissed as withdrawn. There shall be no order as to costs.
As a sequel, Interlocutory Applications pending, if any, shall stand closed.
________________________________________ JUSTICE CHEEKATI MANAVENDRANATH ROY
Date: 31.10.2025 MDP