Dismissed¶38

B.Padmavathi v. the Union of India

Andhra Pradesh HC19 Apr 2026WP/1344/2019

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Dismissal for non-prosecution (default) of a 2019 Article 226 writ petition in which the petitioner, B. Padmavathi, sought to restrain the Union of India, NHAI and its Project Director from using 94 cents of her land in Sy.No.78/1B1, Kothapalem village, Renigunta Mandal, Chittoor District for the six-laning of NH-71 (Renigunta-Nayudupeta) or a modified clover leaf interchange at 4+835 without lawful acquisition, notice and opportunity; interim application under Section 151 CPC. Battu Devanand J., High Court of Andhra Pradesh at Amaravati, 20.04.2026; no costs; pending miscellaneous petitions closed; no merits ruling - cite with caution.

What did the court decide?

No relief granted; writ petition dismissed for non-prosecution with no order as to costs and pending miscellaneous petitions closed. ¶38

B.Padmavathi Vs the Union of India — Writ and Judicial Review | Andhra Pradesh HC (2026)

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

No relief granted; writ petition dismissed for non-prosecution with no order as to costs and pending miscellaneous petitions closed.

¶38

Issue for consideration

Whether the respondents (Union of India, NHAI and its Project Director) may consume or utilise the petitioner's land admeasuring 94 cents in Sy.No.78/1B1 of Kothapalem village, Renigunta Mandal, Chittoor District for the six-laning of NH-71 (Renigunta to Nayudupeta) or for construction of a modified clover leaf interchange at 4+835 without acquiring the land in accordance with law and without notice and opportunity. (Raised by the petition but NOT adjudicated - the writ petition was dismissed for non-prosecution.)

¶17

Ratio / Principle

The writ petition is dismissed for non-prosecution, the petitioner having made no representation on multiple dates despite opportunities and appearing to have no interest in prosecuting the case.

¶38

Key takeaways

As consequential directions, there shall be no order as to costs, and miscellaneous petitions pending, if any, shall stand closed.ratio¶40

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Andhra Pradesh High Court at Amaravati (Special Original Jurisdiction), Single Judge - Battu Devanand J., Writ Petition No.1344 of 2019, decided 20.04.2026: Petition under Article 226 by B. Padmavathi sought a writ of mandamus restraining the Union of India, the NHAI and its Project Director from consuming or utilising her land admeasuring 94 cents in Sy.No.78/1B1 of Kothapalem village, Renigunta Mandal, Chittoor District for the six-laning of NH-71 (Renigunta to Nayudupeta) or for construction of a modified clover leaf interchange at 4+835 without acquiring the land in accordance with law and after notice and opportunity; IA No.1 of 2019 under Section 151 CPC sought interim restraint. There was no representation for the petitioner on 09.03.2026, 23.03.2026, 06.04.2026 and 20.04.2026 despite the matter being posted 'for dismissal' and one final opportunity being given. Holding that the petitioner had no interest to prosecute the case, the Court dismissed the writ petition for non-prosecution, made no order as to costs, and directed that pending miscellaneous petitions stand closed. No issue on the merits of the acquisition objection was adjudicated; the order lays down no ratio on acquisition law and is of limited precedential value.

¶1

APHC010029152019

¶2

[3207]

¶3

IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI

¶4

(Special Original Jurisdiction)

¶5

MONDAY,THE TWENTIETH DAY OF APRIL TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY SIX

¶6

PRESENT

¶7

THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE BATTU DEVANAND

¶8

WRIT PETITION NO: 1344/2019

¶9

Between:

¶10

B.PADMAVATHI, W/O. SUNIL KUMAR REDDY, D.NO. 1-4-13, SRINIVASAPURAM, TIRUPATI, CHITTOOR DISTRICT

¶11

...PETITIONER

¶12

AND

¶13

THE UNION OF INDIA, REP BY ITS., SECRETARY, MINISTRY ROAD TRANSPORTATION AND HIGHWAYS, TRANSPORT BHAVAN, 1, PARLIAMENTSTREET, NWE DELHI

¶14

THE NATIONAL HIGHWAYS AUTHORITY OF INDIA, REP BY ITS CHAIRMAN, NEW DELHI

¶15

THE PROJECT DIRECTOR, NATIONAL HIGHWAYS AUTHORITY OF INDIA, PROJECT IMPLEMENTATION UNIT, TIRUPATI, CHITTOOR DISTRICT.

¶16

...RESPONDENT(S):

¶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 topleased to issue a Writ of Mandamus or any other appropriate writ and direct the respondents to act in accordance with law and forbear from consuming or utilising the land of the petitioner which is admeasuring 94 cents in Sy.No.78/1B1 of Kothapalem village, Renigunta Mandal, Chittoor District in connection with the six lane of NH-71 connecting Renigunta to Nayudupeta or for the purpose of construction of modified clover leaf interchange at 4 plus

¶18

¶19

835 without acquiring the said land in accordance with law and after giving notice and opportunity to the petitioners

¶20

IA NO: 1 OF 2019

¶21

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 not to utilize or consume the land of the petitioner which is admeasuring 94 cents in Sy.No.78/1B1 of Kothapalem village, Renigunta Mandal, Chittoor District in connection with The six lane of NH-71 connecting Renigunta to Nayadupeta or for the purpose of constructionof modified clover leaf interchange at 4+835, pending disposal of the wirit petition and grant such other relief as it deems fit in the circumstances of the cases.

¶22

Counsel for the Petitioner:

¶23