Sri Karapakula Bhaskar Naidu Vs the State of… — Writ and Judicial Review | Andhra Pradesh HC (2026)

Sri Karapakula Bhaskar Naidu Vs the State of… — Writ and Judicial Review | Andhra Pradesh HC (2026)

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

Permission to withdraw the Writ Petition; dismissed as withdrawn; no order as to costs; Miscellaneous Petitions, if any pending, stood closed; no adjudication or relief on the merits of the impugned order DDis.G/1412/2019 Dt. 19.7.2024.

Issue for consideration

Whether permission should be granted to withdraw Writ Petition No. 18359 of 2024 pursuant to the letter dated 05.01.2026 filed by learned counsel for the petitioners. +1 more

Court's answer

Permission is accorded to the petitioners to withdraw the Writ Petition, in view of the letter dated 05.01.2026 filed by learned counsel for the petitioners requesting posting of the matter under the caption for withdrawal.

Ratio / Principle

The Writ Petition is dismissed as withdrawn, with no order as to costs.

Key takeaways

Miscellaneous Petitions, if any, pending in the petition shall stand closed.ratio¶31

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Writ Petition No. 18359 of 2024 - SRI KARAPAKULA BHASKAR NAIDU & 3 others v. THE STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH & 5 others - High Court of Andhra Pradesh at Amaravati (Special Original Jurisdiction) - Order dated 06.01.2026 - Hon'ble Justice D. Ramesh. The writ petition, filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, sought a Writ of Mandamus declaring the action of the 3rd Respondent (Revenue Divisional Officer, Tirupati) in passing order DDis.G/1412/2019 Dt. 19.7.2024 as ex facie illegal, without jurisdiction, arbitrary and a colourable exercise of power, to set aside the same, and directing the 6th Respondent (Tahsildar, Tirupati Rural Mandal) not to act on the directions therein; IA No. 1 of 2024 under Section 151 CPC prayed for suspension of the said order pending disposal. Before adjudication on the merits, by letter dated 05.01.2026, learned counsel for the petitioners requested posting of the matter for withdrawal; permission was accorded, and the Writ Petition was dismissed as withdrawn with no order as to costs, and pending Miscellaneous Petitions stood closed. No ruling was made on the legality of the impugned revenue order.

APHC010361752024

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

[3208]

TUESDAY,THE SIXTH DAY OF JANUARY TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY SIX

PRESENT

THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE D RAMESH WRIT PETITION NO: 18359/2024

Between:

SRI KARAPAKULA BHASKAR NAIDU, S/O PEDDAIAH NAIDU, AGED 61 YEARS, OCC. BUSINESS, R/O H.NO.2144/3, SRI LAKSHMINAGAR, M R PALLI, TIRUPATI TOWN, TIRUPATI DISTRICT.

NAGINENI SUBRAMANYAM, , S/O LATE NAGINENI CHANGALRAYULU, AGED 55 YEARS, OCC. BUSINESS, R/O H.N0.22-19-19/A1, RAVINDRA NAGAR, TIRUPATI, TIRUPATI DISTRICT.

SMT.GALI CHINNA REDDAMMA,, W/O GALI ADINARAYANA, AGED 55 YEARS, OCC. HOME MAKER, R/O H.NO.1-1142, BANDLAVANKA VILLAGE, PILER POST, ANNAMAYYA DISTRICT.

SMT.KARAPAKULA REDDEMMA, , W/O BHASKAR NAIDU, AGED 56 YEARS, OCC. HOME MAKER, R/O H.NO.2-144/3, SRI LAKSHMI NAGAR, M R PALLI, TIRUPATI TOWN, TIRUPATI DISTRICT.

...PETITIONER(S)

AND

THE STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH, REP. BY ITS PRINCIPAL SECRETARY, REVENUE DEPARTMENT, SECRETARIAT BUILDINGS, AMARAVATI.

THE DISTRICT COLLECTOR, TIRUPATI DISTRICT AT TIRUPATI.

THE REVENUE DIVISIONAL OFFICER, TIRUPATI REVENUE DIVISION, TIRUPATI DISTRICT AT TIRUPATI.

THUNGA BALAKRISHNA T BALAKRISHNAIAH, S/O.T.PENCHALAIAH, AGED 55 YEARS, OCC BUSINESS, R/O.THUMMACHETLAPALLE POST AND VILLAGE, CHITVELI MANDAL, ANNAMAYYA DISTRICT.

MR A NISHANTH REDDY, S/O NOT KNOWN TO THE PETITIONER, OCC MAJOR, PRESENTLY HOLDING THE OFFICE OF REVENUE DIVISIONAL OFFICER AT

2

TIRUPATI, O/O RDO, TIRUPATI, TIRUPATI DISTRICT. 6. THE TAHSILDAR, TIRUPATI RURAL MANDAL, TIRUPATI, TIRUPATI DISTRICT.

...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 topleased to issue an appropriate Writ, Order or direction more particularly one in the nature of Writ of Mandamus declaring the action of 3rd Respondent in passing the impugned order viz., DDis.G/1412/2019 Dt. 19.7.2024 as the same is exfacie illegal, without jurisdiction, arbitrary, unjust, colourable exercise of power and in violation of the fundamental principles of law and set aside the same and consequently direct the 6th Respondent not to take any action on the directions issued in DDis.G/1412/2019 Dt. 19.7.2024 and to pass IA NO: 1 OF 2024

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 suspend the order of the 3rd Respondent passed in DDis.G/1412/2019 Dt.19.7.2024 by directing the Respondents not the directions issued in DDis.G/1412/2019to act upon Dt.19.7.2024, pending disposal of the above writ petition and to pass Counsel for the Petitioner(S):

1.GOUTHAMI SURAPAREDDY Counsel for the Respondent(S):

1.GP FOR REVENUE

2.VMR LEGAL The Court made the following:

ORDER:-

In view of the letter dated 05.01.2026 filed by the learned counsel for the petitioners before the Registry, requesting to post the matter under the caption for withdrawal, seeking permission of this Court to withdraw the Writ Petition, permission is accorded.

3

Accordingly, the Writ Petition is dismissed as withdrawn. No order as to costs.

Consequently, Miscellaneous Petitions, if any, pending in the petition shall stand closed .

_____________________

JUSTICE D.RAMESH

Date : 06.01.2026 RMD

4

THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE D RAMESH

WRIT PETITION NO: 18359/2024

Date : 06.01.2026 RMD