Dismissed¶36

V. Raghupathi Naidu, S/o Venkatamuni Naidu, v. The Government of India

Andhra Pradesh HC8 Dec 2025WP/171/2015

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

WP 171/2015, High Court of Andhra Pradesh at Amaravati, Smt Justice Sumathi Jagadam, 09.12.2025 - writ of mandamus against attempted demolition of structures/trees and dispossession without notification, compensation, prior notice or cutting order for NH-4 (National Highway No.4) extension in Sy.No.210, 211, 215, 216, Ac. 21.71 cents, Bangarupalyam Village/Mandal, Chittoor District; alleged violation of Articles 14, 16, 21; IA under Section 151 CPC for stay of dispossession; respondents incl. Government of India (MoRTH), NHAI, District Collector/RDO Chittoor, Tahsildar Bangarupalyam; dismissed as withdrawn, no costs; misc. applications closed; no merits adjudicated.

What did the court decide?

Permission to withdraw the writ petition; no order as to costs; no substantive relief granted. ¶36

V. Raghupathi Naidu, S/o Venkatamuni Naidu… — Writ and Judicial Review | Andhra Pradesh HC (2025)

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

Permission to withdraw the writ petition; no order as to costs; no substantive relief granted.

¶36

Issue for consideration

Whether the action of the Respondents in trying to demolish the Petitioner's structures and trees and dispossessing him without considering his objections, without any notification, compensation, prior notice or cutting order, for acquiring lands in Sy.No.210, 211, 215 and 216 (Ac. 21.71 cents) of Bangarupalyam Village, Bangarupalyam Mandal, Chittoor district for extension of National Highway No.4, is illegal, arbitrary, unconstitutional and violative of Articles 14, 16 and 21 of the Constitution of India.

¶23

Ratio / Principle

Permission accorded to learned counsel for the petitioner to withdraw the writ petition.

¶35

Key takeaways

The Writ Petition is dismissed as withdrawn, with no order as to costs.ratio¶36
As a sequel, miscellaneous applications pending, if any, shall stand closed.ratio¶37

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Writ Petition No. 171 of 2015, High Court of Andhra Pradesh at Amaravati (Special Original Jurisdiction); single Judge: Smt Justice Sumathi Jagadam; decided 09.12.2025. Petitioner V. Raghupathi Naidu, an agriculturist of Bangarupalyam, Chittoor District, filed the writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India seeking a writ of mandamus declaring illegal, arbitrary and unconstitutional (violative of Articles 14, 16 and 21) the respondents' action in trying to demolish his structures and trees and dispossessing him without considering his objections, without notification, compensation, prior notice or cutting order, for acquiring lands in Sy.No.210, 211, 215 and 216 (Ac. 21.71 cents) of Bangarupalyam Village and Mandal, Chittoor district for extension of National Highway No.4, and seeking a consequential direction not to acquire the lands; an interlocutory application (IA No.1 of 2015 / WPMP 184 of 2015) under Section 151 CPC sought stay of dispossession. Respondents included the Government of India (Ministry of Road Transport & Highways), NHAI competent authority/engineers, the District Collector and Revenue Divisional Officer, Chittoor, and the Tahsildar, Bangarupalyam Mandal. On 09.12.2025 learned counsel for the petitioner sought permission to withdraw the petition; permission was accorded and the Writ Petition was dismissed as withdrawn, with no order as to costs; pending miscellaneous applications, if any, stood closed. The substantive allegations were not adjudicated.

¶1

¶2

APHC010385252015

¶3

IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI

¶4

(Special Original Jurisdiction)

¶5

[3459]

¶6

TUESDAY,THE NINTH DAY OF DECEMBER TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE

¶7

PRESENT

¶8

THE HONOURABLE SMT JUSTICE SUMATHI JAGADAM

¶9

WRIT PETITION NO: 171/2015

¶10

Between:

¶11

V. RAGHUPATHI NAIDU, S/O VENKATAMUNI NAIDU, , OCC: AGRICULTURE, R/O: NH-4, MBT MAIN ROAD, BANGARUPALYAM POST & MANDAL, CHITTOOR DISTRICT

¶12

...PETITIONER

¶13

AND

¶14

THE GOVERNMENT OF INDIA, REP. BY ITS DEPUTY SECRETARY, MINISTRY OF ROAD TRANSPORT & HIGHWAYS, NEW DELHI.

¶15

THE COMPETENT AUTHORITY CUM SUPERINTENDENT, ENGINEER, NATIONAL HIGHWAYS AUTHORITY OF INDIA, ANANTHAPUR, ANANTHAPUR DISTRICT.

¶16

THE DISTRICT COLLECTOR CHITTOOR, CHITTOOR DISTRICT, -

¶17

THE COMPETENT AUTHORITYCUMREVENUE, DIVISIONAL OFFICER, CHITTOOR REVENUE DIVISION, CHITTOOR.

¶18

THE DEPUTY ENGINEER, NATIONAL HIGHWAYS AUTHORITY OF INDIA, OPP. ZP OFFICE, CHITTOOR, CHITTOOR DISTRICT.

¶19

THE TAHSILDAR, BANGARUPALYAM MANDAL, BANGARUPALYAM, CHITTOOR DISTRICT

¶20

...RESPONDENT(S):

¶21

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,

¶22

¶23

one in the nature of WRIT OF MANDAMUS declaring the action of the Respondents in trying to demolishing the Petitioner's structures and trees by dispossessing him without considering the objections for the purpose of acquiring the lands for extension of National Highway No.4 without giving any notification, without paying the compensation, without giving any prior notice, without giving any cutting order to sever the trees on the Petitioner's lands in Sy.No.210,211,215 and 216 extent of the land is Ac 21.71 Cents of Bangarupalyam Village, Bangarupalyam Mandal, Chittoor district is illegal, arbitrary, unconstitutional and violative of Article 14.16, and 21 of the Constitution of India and against the principles of the natural justice and consequently direct the Respondents not to acquire the Petitioner's lands for extension of National Highway No.4 in Sy.No.210,211,215 and 216 extent of the land is Ac 21.71 Cents of Bangarupalyam Village, Bangarupalyam Mandal, Chittoor district

¶24

IA NO: 1 OF 2015(WPMP 184 OF 2015

¶25

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 grant stay of dispossession of the petitioner in Sy. No. 210, 211, 215 and 216 extent of the land is Ac.21.71 cents of Bangarupalyam Village & Mandal, Chittoor District.

¶26

Counsel for the Petitioner:

¶27

1.CH VIDYASAGAR

¶28

Counsel for the Respondent(S):

¶29

1.GP FOR REVENUE (AP)

¶30

2.GP FOR ROADS & BUILDINGS (AP)

¶31

¶32

The Court made the following ORDER:

¶33

Learned counsel for the petitioner seeks permission of this Court to

¶34

withdraw the present writ petition.

¶35

Permission is accorded.

¶36

Accordingly, the Writ Petition is dismissed as withdrawn. No order as to costs.

¶37

As a sequel, miscellaneous applications, pending, if any, shall stand closed.

¶38

_______________________________ JUSTICE SUMATHI JAGADAM

¶39

Dt.09.12.2025 SSA

¶40

V. Raghupathi Naidu, S/o Venkatamuni Naidu, v. The Government of India

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

V. Raghupathi Naidu, S/o Venkatamuni Naidu, v. The Government of India

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Why is it important?

What the court decided

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Gajulapalli Asweswara Rao Vs Union of India

N.Vijayakumari Vijayawada & 12 Others Vs Chairman Nc of Schedule Tribe New Delhi & 2 Others

M/s. Madiga Hakkula Parirakshana Seva Samithi, Vs Union of India

Madala Jagan Mohan Rao Vs the Union of India

Jagadeeswara Reddy Bommireddy Vs Union of India

Shaik Gayasuddin Vs the Union of India