Disposed

Epuri Maha Vishnu v. the State of Ap

Andhra Pradesh HC16 Sept 2026WP/20703/2025

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The petitioner challenged CMA No.2 of 2015 pending before the Additional Agent to Government, East Godavari District, Rampachodavaram, arguing it was not maintainable because the underlying LTR No.13 of 2010 depended on an order previously quashed by the High Court in W.P.No.12709 of 1988. The High Court disposed of the writ petition, directing the competent authority to consider the earlier High Court order and decide the CMA expeditiously, preferably within three months.

What did the court decide?

Writ petition disposed of; competent authority directed to consider the order in W.P.No.12709 of 1988 and decide CMA No.2 of 2015 expeditiously, preferably within three months.

Epuri Maha Vishnu Vs the State of Ap — Land Acquisition | Andhra Pradesh HC (2026)

¶1

¶2

APHC010401742025

¶3

IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI

¶4

(Special Original Jurisdiction)

¶5

[3457]

¶6

THURSDAY, THE 17^th DAY OF SEPTEMBER 2026

¶7

PRESENT

¶8

THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE HARINATH.N

¶9

WRIT PETITION NO: 20703/2025

¶10

Between:

¶11

EPURI MAHA VISHNU, S/Q LATE EPURI VENKATA RAMA RAJU, AGED ABOUT 38 YEARS, OCC CULTIVATION, R/O. DOOR NO.194,ANAPARTHI VILLAGE AND MANDAL, EAST GODAVARI, A.P. 533342

¶12

...PETITIONER

¶13

AND

¶14

THE STATE OF AP, REP. BY ITS PRINCIPAL SECRETARY, TRIBAL WELFARE DEPARTMENT, ANDHRA PRADESH SECRETARIAT, VELAGAPUDI, AMARAVATI, GUNTUR DISTRICT, ANDHRA PRADESH.

¶15

INTEGRATED TRIBAL DEVELOPMENT AGENCY ITDA, REP BY PROJECT OFFICER, RAMPACHODAVARAM, EAST GODAVARI DISTRICT, ANDHRA PRADESH.

¶16

THE DISTRICT COLLECTOR, RAJAMAHENDRAVARAM, EAST GODAVARAI DISTRICT, ANDHRA PRADESH.

¶17

SARAPU JOGI DORA, S/O BAPANNA DORA AGED ABOUT 55 YEARS, K.EERRAMPALEM VILLAGE, RAMPACHODAVARAM MANDAL, FOX PETA PANCHYATH, EAST GODAVARI DISTRICT, .AP.-533288

¶18

KARAM NOOKARAJU DORA, S/O VEERASWAMY DORA. AGED ABOUT NOT KNOWN, K.EERRAMPALEM VILLAGE, RAMPACHODAVARAM MANDAL, FOX PETA PANCHYATH, EAST

¶19

¶20

GODAVARI DISTRICT, .AP.-533288.

¶21

SARAPU MUTYALAMMA, , W/O RAMANNA DORA. AGED ABOUT NOT KNOWN, K.EERRAMPALEM VILLAGE, RAMPACHODAVARAM MANDAL, FOX PETA PANCHYATH, EAST GODAVARI DISTRICT, .AP.-533288

¶22

SUNDAM LAXMI, , W/O NARASANNA DORA AGED ABOUT NOT KNOWN, K.EERRAMPALEM VILLAGE, RAMPACHODAVARAM MANDAL, FOX PETA PANCHYATH, EAST GODAVARI DISTRICT, .AP.-533288

¶23

...RESPONDENT(S):

¶24

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 to pleased to issue a Writ, Order or Direction more particularly one in the nature of Writ of Mandamus set aside the CMA No.2 of 2015 filed before the court of the AddI agent to Govt East Godavari District, Rampachodavaram and the same proceedings may be declared as null and void and same may be quashed in the interest of justice otherwise this petitioner may be put to irreparable loss and hard ship., the Hon’ble Court may pass

¶25

IA NO: 1 OF 2025

¶26

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 Stay all the further proceedings in CMA No.2 of 2015 filed before the court of the AddI agent to Govt East Godavari District, Rampachodavaram until disposal of the above Writ Petition and pass

¶27

IA NO: 1 OF 2026

¶28

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 may be pleased to vacate the interim order dated 21.08.2025 passed W.P.No. 20703 of 2025 and dismiss the Writ Petition and pass

¶29

Counsel for the Petitioner:

¶30

1.G VENKATA SUBBA RAJU

¶31

Counsel for the Respondent(S):

¶32

¶33

1.GP FOR REVENUE

¶34

2.GP FOR SOCIAL WELFARE

¶35

¶36

The Court made the following order:

¶37

The present Writ Petition is filed seeking to set aside C.M.A. No.2 of 2015 pending on the file of the Additional Agent to Government, East Godavari District, Rampachodavaram.

¶38

It is the specific case of the petitioner that the unofficial respondents are raising the same issue by claiming title over the lands in Sy.Nos.92, 97 and 100/3 of K. Eerrampalem Village, Rampachodavaram Mandal, admeasuring Ac.2.21 cents, Ac.3.20 cents and Ac.0.89 cents.

¶39

It is submitted that the LTR No.13 of 2010 was decided on 27.06.2015 by referring to the earlier LTR No.276 of 1980, which was quashed by the Hon’ble High Court of Andhra Pradesh in W.P.No.12709 of 1988. It is further submitted that the order passed by this Court in W.P.No.12709 of 1988 has obtained finality, as no appeal was filed. As such, LTR No.13 of 2010 itself was not maintainable.

¶40

However, the unofficial respondents filed the C.M.A., and the pendency of the said C.M.A is compelling the petitioner to pursue the matter, which could not have taken up by the Additional Agent and competent authority.

¶41

The 2^nd respondent has filed a counter and it is submitted that the unofficial respondents had filed W.P.No.31879 of 2015, aggrieved by the inaction on part of the Additional Agent to the Government in not considering and adjudicating the C.M.P. and C.M.A. filed against the order passed by the

¶42

¶43

Rampachodavaram Agency Divisional Officer in ADO LTR No.13 of 2010. This court disposed of the Writ Petition by directing the competent authority therein to pass appropriate orders on the appeal filed by the unofficial respondents herein.

¶44

The present Writ Petition is filed aggrieved by the initiation of the C.M.A.No.2 of 2015 by the unofficial respondents. The grounds raised by the petitioner submitting that C.M.A.No. No.2 of 2015 is not maintainable would have to be raised before the competent authority before whom the C.M.A. is pending. The competent authority would have to consider the order passed by this Court in W.P.No.12709 of 1988 and thereafter dispose of the C.M.A. as expeditiously as possible, preferably within a period of three (3) months from the date of receipt of a copy of this order.

¶45

Accordingly, the Writ Petition is disposed of. There shall be no

¶46

order as to costs.

¶47

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

¶48

____________________ JUSTICE HARINATH.N

¶49

17.09.2026 RJS/GCD

¶50

¶51

HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE HARINATH.N

¶52

WRIT PETITION NO: 20703 of 2025

¶53

Dt: 17.09.2026

¶54

RJS/GCD

Epuri Maha Vishnu v. the State of Ap

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Epuri Maha Vishnu v. the State of Ap

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Cases cited

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases