Dismissed¶33

Neelapu Ramana, v. The State of Andhra Pradesh

Andhra Pradesh HC5 Aug 2025WP/18711/2019

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Dismissal for non-prosecution; no representation by petitioner; writ of mandamus under Article 226; suspension from service; Roc.No.3379/2018/F2 dt.12.07.2019; Municipal Corporation Kakinada; FIR No.117 of 2018 dt.13.06.2018; Neelapu Ramana v. State of Andhra Pradesh and others; Neelapu Alekya (respondent No.4); IA No.1 of 2019 under Section 151 CPC; listed 'For Dismissal' per direction dated 27.07.2025; Justice B.V.L.N. Chakravarthi; decided 06.08.2025; no order as to costs; interlocutory applications closed.

What did the court decide?

None. Writ petition dismissed for non-prosecution; no order as to costs; pending interlocutory applications closed. ¶33

Neelapu Ramana, Vs The State of Andhra Pradesh — Writ and Judicial Review | Andhra Pradesh HC (2025)

¶1

APHC010389332019

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction)

¶3

[3368]

¶4

WEDNESDAY, THE SIXTH DAY OF AUGUST TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE

¶5

PRESENT

¶6

THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE B V L N CHAKRAVARTHI WRIT PETITION NO: 18711/2019

¶7

Between:

¶8

NEELAPU RAMANA,, S/O. LATE TATA REDDY AGE 58 YEARS, OCC. PUBLIC HEALTH WORKER, CIRCLE NO. 4, MUNICIPAL CORPORATION KAKINADA, R/O. D.NO. 15-220, GORUSUVARI STREET, RAMAKRISHNARAOPETA, KAKINADA, EAST GODAVARI DISTRICT, ANDHRA PRADESH.

¶9

...PETITIONER

¶10

AND

¶11

THE STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH, REPRESENTED.BY ITS PRINCIPLE SECRETARY, MUNICIPAL ADMINISTRATION, SECRETARIAT BUILDINGS, AT VELAGAPUDI, GUNTUR DISTRICT, ANDHRA PRADESH.

¶12

THE COMMISSIONER, MUNICIPAL CORPORATION, KAKINADA, EAST GODAVARI DISTRICT, ANDHRA PRADESH.

¶13

THE DISTRICT COLLECTOR, EAST GODAVARI DISTRICT AT KAKINADA, EAST GODAVARI DISTRICT, ANDHRA PRADESH.

¶14

NEELAPU ALEKYA, W/O. LATE TATA REDDY AGED 18 YEARS, R/O. D.NO.15-12-19, RAMAKRISHNARAOPET, KAKINADA, EAST GODAVARI DISTRICT, ANDHRA PRADESH.

¶15

...RESPONDENT(S):

¶16

¶17

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 to issue a writ or order or direction more particularly one in the nature of Writ of Mandamus declaring the action of the 2nd respondent in suspending the petitioner from service in Roc.No.3379/2018/F2 dt. 12.07.2019 basing on the FIR No. 117 of 2018 dt. 13.06.2018 filed by the 4the respondent herein as well as other communications of 4th respondent to the Revenue authorities as illegal, arbitrary and also oppose to all cannons of justice, consequently suspend the proceedings of the 2nd respondent in Roc.No.3379/2018/F2 dt. 12.07.2019 and to pass

¶18

IA NO: 1 OF 2019

¶19

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 suspend the proceedings of the 2nd respondent in Roc.No.3379/2018/F2 dt. 12.07.2019 pending disposal of the above writ petition and to pass

¶20

Counsel for the Petitioner:

¶21

1.RAVULA NAGARJUNA

¶22

Counsel for the Respondent(S):

¶23

1.GP FOR REVENUE (AP)

¶24

2.D.KASIM SAHEB(SC FOR MUNICIPALITIES SERVICE

¶25

3.GP FOR MUNCIPAL ADMN URBAN DEV

¶26

4.T V JAGGI REDDY

¶27

¶28

THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE B.V.L.N. CHAKRAVARTHI

¶29

WRIT PETITION NO: 18711 of 2019

¶30

The Court made the following Order:

¶31

This Court after perusing the earlier proceedings gave a direction on 27.07.2025, to list the matter under the caption ‘For Dismissal’. However, today also, there is no representation for the petitioner.

¶32

Learned Additional Government Pleader representing the State and Sri T.V.Jaggi Reddy, learned counsel for the unofficial respondent No.4 are in attendance.

¶33