Dismissed¶43

Pulivarthi Venkata Mani Prasad @ Nani, v. The State of Andhra Pradesh

Andhra Pradesh HC2 Mar 2026WP/11943/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Armed security cover; 3 plus 3 / 3+3 personal security; writ of mandamus; Article 226; Articles 14 and 21; representations dated 14-05-2024; infructuous; dismissal; no order as to costs; Telugu Desam Party Incharge; Chandragiri Assembly Constituency; Tirupati; Andhra Pradesh; State Level Security Review Committee; Election Commission of India; Chief Electoral Officer; Section 151 CPC; IA No. 1 of 2024; Writ Petition No. 11943 of 2024; Dr Justice Venkata Jyothirmai Pratapa.

What did the court decide?

Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the relief in the matter had become infructuous; recording the same, the Court dismissed the Writ Petition as infructuous, with no order as to costs, and as a sequel directed that miscellaneous petitions pending, if any, stand closed. ¶43

Pulivarthi Venkata Mani Prasad @ Nani, Vs… — Writ and Judicial Review | Andhra Pradesh HC (2026)

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

Dismissed

¶43

Issue for consideration

Whether the respondents' action in not providing 3 plus 3 armed security cover individually to each of petitioners 1 to 3, despite their representations dated 14-05-2024, is contrary to law, illegal, arbitrary, malafide and violative of Articles 14 and 21 of the Constitution of India, and whether a writ of mandamus should issue directing the respondents to provide such security forthwith.

¶23

Ratio / Principle

¶43

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Andhra Pradesh High Court at Amaravati (Special Original Jurisdiction), Writ Petition No. 11943 of 2024, decided 03.03.2026 by Dr Justice Venkata Jyothirmai Pratapa. Petitioners — Pulivarthi Venkata Mani Prasad @ Nani (occ. Telugu Desam Party Incharge, Chandragiri Assembly Constituency, Tirupati District), his wife K. Gana Sudha @ Sudha Reddy, and son Pulivarthi Vineel Sai Vardhan Reddy — filed a writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India seeking a writ of mandamus declaring the respondents' action in not providing 3 plus 3 armed security cover individually to each petitioner, by considering their representations dated 14-05-2024, as contrary to law, illegal, arbitrary, malafide and violative of Articles 14 and 21, and seeking a consequential direction to provide such security forthwith. An interlocutory application (IA No. 1 of 2024) under Section 151 CPC sought the same relief pending disposal of the writ petition. Respondents included the State of Andhra Pradesh (Home Department), the DGP, the District Collector-cum-District Election Officer, Tirupati, the Superintendent of Police, Tirupati, the State Level Security Review Committee, the Election Commission of India and the Chief Electoral Officer, Andhra Pradesh. At the final hearing, learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the relief had become infructuous; the learned Assistant Government Pleader for Home was in attendance. Recording the submission, the Court dismissed the writ petition as infructuous, with no order as to costs, and closed miscellaneous petitions, if any. The Court rendered no decision on the merits of the security-cover grievance.

¶1

[3396]

¶2

APHC010242062024

¶3

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

¶4

TUESDAY, THE THIRD DAY OF MARCH TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY SIX

¶5

PRESENT

¶6

THE HONOURABLE DR JUSTICE VENKATA JYOTHIRMAI PRATAPA WRIT PETITION NO: 11943/2024

¶7

Between:

¶8

PULIVARTHI VENKATA MANI PRASAD @ NANI,, S/O. PULIVARTHI NAGARAJU NAIDU, AGE 52, OCC. TELUGU DESAM PARTY INCHARGE, CHANDRAGIRI ASSEMBLY CONSTITUENCY, TIRUPATI DISTRICT, R/O. PLOT NO. 38, GAJALAKSHMI NAGAR, OPP. RAMANAIDU KALYAMANDAPAM, TANAPALLI ROAD, TIRUPATHI TOWN AND DISTRICT.

¶9

K. GANA SUDHA @ SUDHA REDDY,, W/O. PULIVARTHI VENKATA MANI PRASAD @ NANI, AGE 50, OCC HOUSE WIFE, R/O. PLOT NO. 38, GAJALAKSHMI NAGAR, OPP. RAMANAIDU KALYAMANDAPAM, TANAPALLI ROAD, TIRUPATHI TOWN AND DISTRICT.

¶10

PULIVARTHI VINEEL SAI VARDHAN REDDY,, S/O. PULIVARTHI VENKATA MANI PRASAD @ NANI, AGE 29 R/O. PLOT NO. 38, GAJALAKSHMI NAGAR, OPP. RAMANAIDU KALYAMANDAPAM, TANAPALLI ROAD, TIRUPATHI TOWN AND DISTRICT.

¶11

...PETITIONER(S)

¶12

AND

¶13

THE STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH, REPRESENTED BY ITS PRINCIPAL SECRETARY, HOME DEPARTMENT, SECRETARIAT BUILDINGS, VELAGAPUDI, AMARAVATI, GUNTUR DISTRICT.

¶14

THE DIRECTOR GENERAL OF POLICE, STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH, MANGALAGIRI, GUNTUR DISTRICT.

¶15

Dr.VJP,J W.P No.11943 of 2024

¶16

¶17

THE DISTRICT COLLECTOR CUM THE DISTRICT ELECTION OFFICER, COLLECTORS OFFICE, TIRUPATHI DISTRICT.

¶18

THE SUPERINTENDENT OF POLICE, TIRUPATHI, TIRUPATHI DISTRICT.

¶19

THE STATE LEVEL SECURITY REVIEW COMMITTEE, STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH, POLICE HEAD QUARTERS, MANGALAGIRI, GUNTUR DISTRICT.

¶20

THE ELECTION COMMISSION OF INDIA, REP. BY CHIEF ELECTION COMMISSIONER, NIRVACHAN SADAN, ASHOKA RD, PANDIT PANT MARG AREA, SANSAD MARG AREA, NEW DELHI, DELHI - 110001.

¶21

THE CHIEF ELECTORAL OFFICER, ANDHRA PRADESH, A.P. SECRETARIAT, 4TH BLOCK, ROOM NO. 101, GROUND FLOOR, PENUMAKA, AMARAVATI RD., VELAGAPUDI, AMARAVATI - 522503.

¶22

...RESPONDENT(S):

¶23

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 topleased to issue a Writ, order or a direction, more particularly one in the nature of Writ of Mandamus declaring the action of the respondents in not providing 3 plus 3 armed security cover individually to each of the petitioners 1 to 3 by considering the representations dated 14-05-2024, as the same is contrary to law, illegal, arbitrary, malafide and in violation of Articles 14 and 21 of the Constitution of India and consequently to direct the respondents to provide 3 plus 3 armed security cover individually to the petitioners forthwith by considering the representations dated 14-05-2024 and to pass

¶24

IA NO: 1 OF 2024

¶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 pleased to direct the respondents to provide 3+3 armed security cover individually to each of the petitioners 1 to 3 forthwith by considering the representations dated 14-05-2024, pending disposal of the Writ Petition, and to pass

¶26

Dr.VJP,J W.P No.11943 of 2024

¶27

¶28

Counsel for the Petitioner(S):

¶29

1.P SAI SURYA TEJA

¶30

Counsel for the Respondent(S):

¶31

1.GP FOR HOME

¶32

Dr.VJP,J W.P No.11943 of 2024

¶33

¶34

THE HONOURABLE DR JUSTICE VENKATA JYOTHIRMAI PRATAPA WRIT PETITION NO: 11943/2024

¶35

The Court made the following Order:

¶36

This Writ Petition is filed under Article 226 of Constitution of India with

¶37

the following prayer for:

¶38

<…to issue a Writ, order or a direction, more particularly one in the nature of Writ of Mandamus declaring the action of the respondents in not providing 3 + 3 armed security cover individually to each of the petitioners 1 to 3 by considering the representations dated 1405-2024, as the same is contrary to law, illegal, arbitrary, malafide and in violation of Articles 14 and 21 of the Constitution of India and consequently to direct the respondents to provide 3 + 3 armed security cover individually to the petitioners forthwith by considering the representations dated 14-05-2024 and to pass such other and further orders.=

¶39