Gujjala Obula Reddy, Vs The State of Andhra… — Writ and Judicial Review | Andhra Pradesh HC (2026)

Gujjala Obula Reddy, Vs The State of Andhra… — Writ and Judicial Review | Andhra Pradesh HC (2026)

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

No substantive relief; writ petition dismissed as infructuous, no order as to costs, and pending miscellaneous petitions closed.

Issue for consideration

Whether the action of the 3rd respondent in interfering with the petitioners' peaceful possession and enjoyment of Ac.32-04 cents in Sy.Nos. 735, 736, 737/1 and 737/2, Boddikurapadu Village, Talluru Mandal, Prakasam District, and the standing Eucalyptus (Jamail) Trees thereon, was unlawful, and whether the petitioners were entitled to six months' time to harvest the standing crop.

Ratio / Principle

Upon learned counsel for the petitioners representing that the cause in the writ petition does not survive and the matter has been rendered infructuous, the Court recorded the submission and dismissed the Writ Petition as infructuous, with no order as to costs.

Key takeaways

As a sequel to the dismissal, miscellaneous petitions pending in the writ petition were directed to stand closed.ratio¶34

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Writ Petition No.16551 of 2016, High Court of Andhra Pradesh at Amaravati (Special Original Jurisdiction), Justice Tarlada Rajasekhar Rao, dated 18.06.2026 - Dismissed as infructuous. Three agriculturists of Boddikurapadu Village, Talluru Mandal, Prakasam District (Gujjala Obula Reddy, Lakku Rosi Reddy and Gujjala Anji Reddy) had sought, under Article 226 of the Constitution, a writ of mandamus declaring illegal the action of the 3rd respondent, Sri Madhava Swamy Devasthanam, in interfering with their peaceful possession and enjoyment of Ac.32-04 cents in Sy.Nos. 735, 736, 737/1 and 737/2 and the standing Eucalyptus (Jamail) Trees thereon, and directing grant of six months' time to harvest the standing crop; interim applications under Section 151 CPC (WPMP 20418/2016; WPMP 27323/2016 seeking impleadment as Respondent Nos. 4 to 6; WVMP 116995/2016) had also been filed. At the hearing, learned counsel for the petitioners represented that the cause no longer survived and the matter had been rendered infructuous, endorsing the submission on the bundle; the Court recorded the submission, dismissed the writ petition as infructuous, made no order as to costs, and closed pending miscellaneous petitions. No point of law was framed, argued or decided.

[3330]

APHC010148462016

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

THURSDAY,THE EIGHTEENTH DAY OF JUNE TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY SIX

PRESENT

THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE TARLADA RAJASEKHAR RAO WRIT PETITION NO: 16551/2016

Between:

GUJJALA OBULA REDDY,, S/O. CHENNA REDDY, AGED ABOUT 52 YEARS, OCC: AGRICULTURIST R/O. BODDIKURAPADU VILLAGE, TALLURU MANDAL, PRAKASHAM DISTRICT.

LAKKU ROSI REDDY,, S/O. MUSALA REDDY, AGED ABOUT 32 YEARS, OCC: AGRICULTURIST R/O. BODDIKURAPADU VILLAGE, TALLURU MANDAL, PRAKASHAM DISTRICT.

GUJJALA ANJI REDDY,, S/O. VENKATA SUBBA REDDY, AGED ABOUT 34 YEARS, OCC: AGRICULTURIST BODDIKURAPADU VILLAGE, TALLURU MANDAL, PRAKASHAM DISTRICT.

...PETITIONER(S)

AND

THE STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH, REP. BY ITS PRL. SECRETARY, ENDOWMENTS DEPARTMENT, A.P., SECRETARIAT, SECRETARIAT BUILDINGS, HYDERABAD.

THE COMMISSIONER OF ENDOWMENTS, STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH, DHARMIKA BHAVAN, BOGGULAKUNTA, TILAK ROAD, HYDERABAD.

SRI MADHAVA SWAMY DEVASTHANAM, (GROUP OF TEMPLES), BODDUGUREPADU VILLAGE, TALLURU MANDAL, PRAKASHAM DISTRICT, REP. BY ITS MANAGER/EXECUTIVE OFFICER.

...RESPONDENT(S):

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 a Writ, Order or eirection more particularly one in the nature of `Writ of Mandamus' declaring the action of the 3rd respondent in interfering with the petitioners' peaceful possession and enjoyment of the lands, admeasuring Ac_32-04 cents in Sy.Nos. 735, 736, 737/1 and 737/2 Boddikurapadu Talluru Mandal, Prakasam District and existing standing Eucalyptus Oamail) Trees as illegal, unjust, arbitrary, void, contrary to law, violation of principles of natural justice and consequently direct the 3rd respondent to extend/grant six months time to enable the petitioners to harvest of the ousting standing crop, Eucalyptus (Jamail) Trees, in the lands,

2

admeasuring Ac.32-04 cents in Sy.Nos. 735, 736, 737/1 and 737/2 Boddikurapadu Village, Talluru Mandal, Prakasam District and pass IA NO: 1 OF 2016(WPMP 20418 OF 2016

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 direct the respondents not to interfere with the petitioners' peaceful possession and enjoyment of the lands, by granting/ extending six months time, to enable the petitioners to harvest of the existing standing crop, Eucalyptus (Jamail) Trees, in the lands, admeasuring Ac.32-04 cents in Sy.Nos. 735, 736, 737/1 and 737/2 Boddikurapadu Village, Talluru Mandel, Prakasam District, and pass

IA NO: 2 OF 2016(WPMP 27323 OF 2016

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 implead the Petitioners as Respondent Nos. 4 to 6 in W.P.No.16551/2016 and pass

IA NO: 6 OF 2016(WVMP 116995 OF 2016

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 Counsel for the Petitioner(S):

1.S V MUNI REDDY

Counsel for the Respondent(S):

1.K ANANDA RAO

2.GP FOR ENDOWMENTS (AP) The Court made the following:

3

THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE TARLADA RAJASEKHAR RAO WRIT PETITION No.16551 of 2016

ORDER:

Learned counsel for the petitioners represented and stated that cause in the writ petition does not survive and that the matter has rendered infructuous. Learned counsel endorsed the same on the bundle.

Recording the said submission, the present Writ Petition is dismissed as infructuous. There shall be no order as to costs.

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

__________________________________ JUSTICE TARLADA RAJASEKHAR RAO

Date: 18.06.2026

KBN

4

08

THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE TARLADA RAJASEKHAR RAO

WRIT PETITION No. 16551 of 2016

Date: 18.06.2026

KBN