Disposed¶6

Bodapati Siva Nagaraju v. The State of Andhra Pradesh

Andhra Pradesh HC14 Jun 2026WA/659/2026

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Writ Appeal No.659 of 2026, High Court of Andhra Pradesh at Amaravathi, proceeding sheet dated 15.06.2026, Bench RRR, J & TCDS, J. Interim applications allowed: leave to a non-party petitioner claiming rights over land to file appeal against admission-stage orders in W.P.No.27549 of 2025; condonation of 127-day delay; dispensation of certified copy of order dated 10.12.2025. Appeal disposed of vide separate judgment. No statutes or precedents cited; no quantum involved.

What did the court decide?

I.A.Nos.1 to 3 of 2026 allowed: leave granted to the petitioner (a non-party to W.P.No.27549 of 2025) to file the appeal; delay of 127 days condoned; filing of copy of order dated 10.12.2025 in W.P.No.27549 of 2025 dispensed with; Writ Appeal No.659 of 2026 disposed of vide separate Judgment. ¶6

Bodapati Siva Nagaraju Vs The State of Andhra Pradesh — Andhra Pradesh HC (2026) — LawSathi Research

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

¶6

Issue for consideration

Whether the petitioner, who was not a party to W.P.No.27549 of 2025 (in which orders were passed at the stage of admission), could be permitted to file the writ appeal claiming rights over the subject land. +1 more

¶4

Court's answer

Leave granted (I.A.No.1 of 2026): since the petitioner was not a party to the writ petition and the orders were passed at the stage of admission, it was held appropriate that the petitioner be permitted to file the present appeal, as the petitioner claims certain rights over the said land.

¶4

Ratio / Principle

Delay of 127 days in filing the writ appeal is condoned (I.A.No.2 of 2026 allowed) for the reasons averred in the affidavit filed in support of the petition.

¶4

Key takeaways

Filing of copy of order dated 10.12.2025 in W.P.No.27549 of 2025 is dispensed with (I.A.No.3 of 2026 allowed) for the reasons averred in the supporting affidavit.ratio¶6
The Writ Appeal (W.A.No.659 of 2026) is disposed of, vide separate Judgment; the substantive reasons are contained in that separate judgment, which is not part of this document.ratio¶6

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

High Court of Andhra Pradesh at Amaravathi — Writ Appeal No.659 of 2026 (proceeding sheet, dated 15.06.2026, RRR, J & TCDS, J): (i) I.A.No.1 of 2026 allowed — leave granted to the petitioner to file the writ appeal although he was not a party to W.P.No.27549 of 2025, the orders therein having been passed at the stage of admission, as the petitioner claims certain rights over the said land; (ii) I.A.No.2 of 2026 allowed — delay of 127 days in filing the appeal condoned; (iii) I.A.No.3 of 2026 allowed — filing of copy of order dated 10.12.2025 in W.P.No.27549 of 2025 dispensed with; (iv) the Writ Appeal is disposed of vide separate Judgment (substantive judgment not part of this document).

¶1

HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATHI

¶2

Writ Appeal No.659 of 2026

¶3

PROCEEDING SHEET

¶4

Sl.No	DATE	ORDER	Office Note
	15.06.2026	RRR, J & TCDS,J I.A.No.1 of 2026 This is an application to grant leave. As the petitioner was not a party to the writ petition and the orders have been passed at the stage of admission, it would only be appropriate that the petitioner is permitted to file the present appeal, as the petitioner claims certain rights over the said land. Accordingly, this application is allowed. I.A.No.2 of 2026
		This is an application to condone the delay of 127 days. For the reasons averred in the affidavit filed in support of the petition, delay is condoned. Accordingly, this application is allowed.
		I.A.No.3 of 2026
		This is an application to dispense with filing of copy of order dated 10.12.2025 in

¶5

¶6

W.P.No.27549 of 2025. For the reasons averred in the affidavit
filed in support of the petition, filing of copy of order (supra) is dispensed with. Accordingly, this application is allowed.
_______ RRR, J
________ TCDS, J
W.A.No.659 of 2026 The Writ Appeal is disposed of (Vide separate Judgment)
_______ RRR, J
________ TCDS, J KA

¶7

Bodapati Siva Nagaraju v. The State of Andhra Pradesh

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Bodapati Siva Nagaraju v. The State of Andhra Pradesh

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Why is it important?

What the court decided

Issues for consideration

Procedural history

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

M/s P.S.R. Infrastructures, Vs Assistant Commissioner of State Tax

M/s Sri Lakshmi General Stores Vs Assistant Commissioner of State Tax

M/S Crantya Geospatial Private Limited Vs the Deputy Assistant Commissioner (St)

Kagithala Lakshmi SanthaKumari Vs The State of Andhra Pradesh

M/S Gsn Granites Vs The Assistant Commissioner (St)

M/S Sree Srinivasa Stone Crushers Vs The Assistant Commissioner of Central Tax