Dismissed

Varanasi Ranga Rao v. The State of Andhra Pradesh

Andhra Pradesh HC14 Sept 2026WP/34790/2018

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The petitioner failed to appear on multiple hearing dates despite the matter being listed for dismissal. The court dismissed the writ petition for default with no order as to costs and directed that any pending miscellaneous petitions stand closed.

What did the court decide?

Writ petition dismissed for default; no order as to costs; pending miscellaneous petitions closed.

Varanasi Ranga Rao Vs The State of Andhra Pradesh — Property and Title | Andhra Pradesh HC (2026)

¶1

[3333]

¶2

APHC010718822018

¶3

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

¶4

TUESDAY, THE 15^th DAY OF SEPTEMBER 2026

¶5

PRESENT

¶6

THE HONOURABLE SMT JUSTICE V.SUJATHA

¶7

WRIT PETITION NO: 34790/2018

¶8

Between:

¶9

VARANASI RANGA RAO, S/O VARANASI KRISHNA MURTHY, AGED ABOUT 60 YEARS, R/O SRIKAKULAM TOWN AND MANDAL, SRIKAKULAM DISTRICT.

¶10

...PETITIONER

¶11

AND

¶12

THE STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH, REP. BY ITS PRINCIPAL SECRETARY, REVENUE DEPARTMENT, SECRETARIAT, VELAGAPUDI HYDERABAD.

¶13

THE JOINT COLLECTOR AND ADDL DISTRICT MAGISTRATE, SRIKAKULAM DISTRICT, SRIKAKULAM.

¶14

THE REVENUE DIVISIONAL OFFICER, SRIKAKULAM, SRIKAKULAM DISTRICT.

¶15

THE TAHSILDAR, ETCHERLA MANDAL, SRIKAKULAM 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 toto issue an appropriate Writ, Order or Direction, more particularly one in the nature of Writ of Mandamus, to declare the action of the 2nd respondent in passing the impugned order dt. 23-8-2018 in Revision Petition No. 1681/2018 D8 declined to adjudicate the revision petition on merits and thereby failed to exercise the jurisdiction vested in him, as being illegal,

¶18

¶19

VS,J W.P.No.34790 of 2018

¶20

arbitrary and unjust and consequently direct the 2nd respondent herein to pass orders on merits in accordance with the provisions of A.P.Rights in Land and Pattadar Pass Book Act, and to grant

¶21

IA NO: 1 OF 2018

¶22

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 Respondent authorities not to give any effect to the Pattadar pass books and title deeds issued in favour of third party in respect of the land admeasuring Ac. 3-12 cents out of the total extent of Ac. 11.15 cents and Ac. 0.81 cents out of Ac. 1.11 cents in Sy.No. 156 and 162/6 situated at Duppalavalasa village, Etcherla Mandal, Srikakulam District, pending disposal of the main Writ Petition, and to pass

¶23

Counsel for the Petitioner:

¶24

1.NARASIMHA RAO ANANTHULA

¶25

Counsel for the Respondent(S):

¶26

1.GP FOR REVENUE (AP)

¶27

The Court made the following:

¶28

¶29

VS,J W.P.No.34790 of 2018

¶30

ORDER:

¶31

When the writ petition came up for hearing on 01.09.2026, there was no representation on behalf of the petitioner, as such, the matter was posted to 08.09.2026. Even on 08.09.2026, when the matter was called, there was no representation on behalf of counsel for the petitioner, hence, the matter was directed to be posted on 15.09.2026 under the caption ‘for dismissal’.

¶32

Today, though the matter is listed under the caption ‘for dismissal’, there was no representation on behalf of the petitioner. It seems that the petitioner is not evincing any interest in pursuing the matter.

¶33

In view of the same, this writ petition is dismissed for default. There shall be no order as to costs.

¶34

Consequently, Miscellaneous Petitions, if any, pending in this Petition shall stand closed.

¶35

_____________________ JUSTICE V.SUJATHA

¶36

15.09.2026 Gss

Varanasi Ranga Rao v. The State of Andhra Pradesh

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Varanasi Ranga Rao v. The State of Andhra Pradesh

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases