Dismissed¶23

N Kumar v. Union of India

Andhra Pradesh HC2 Feb 2026WP/7432/2019

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Andhra Pradesh High Court, Amaravati; W.P. No.7432 of 2019; Justice K. Sreenivasa Reddy; decided 03.02.2026; writ of mandamus; deduction from running bills; road over bridge (ROB); LC No.75 km 145/200 and LC No.67 km 133/200 on NH-205; Katpadi-Pakala Section NH 18; Memo DWA/AP/HYD No.217 dated 22.08.2016; GOMs No.125 dated 29.12.2016; PAG (Audit) letter dated 03.07.2018; dismissed as infrunctuous; Union of India; no costs.

What did the court decide?

The Court recorded the petitioner's submission that the cause in the Writ Petition does not survive for adjudication and dismissed the Writ Petition as infructuous, with no order as to costs; pending miscellaneous applications stood closed. ¶23

N Kumar Vs Union of India — Andhra Pradesh HC (2026) — LawSathi Research

¶1

APHC010172162019

¶2

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

¶3

[3327]

¶4

TUESDAY, THE THIRD DAY OF FEBRUARY TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY SIX

¶5

PRESENT

¶6

THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE K SREENIVASA REDDY

¶7

WRIT PETITION NO.7432 OF 2019

¶8

Between:

¶9

N. Kumar ...PETITIONER

¶10

AND

¶11

Union of India and others

¶12

...RESPONDENTS

¶13

Counsel for the Petitioner:

¶14

1.VENKATESWARLU GADA

¶15

Counsel for the Respondents:

¶16

1.DEPUTY SOLICITOR GENERAL OF INDIA

¶17

The Court made the following ORDER:

¶18

The present Writ Petition has been filed seeking the following relief.

¶19

“…….to issue a Writ of Mandamus or any other appropriate Writ, declaring the Memo DWA / AP / HYD / Snl / A / 2016-17 / No.217, dated 22.08.2016, Memo in GOMs No.125, dated 29.12.2016 (in so for as it affects the Petitioner’s right), Principal Accountant-General (Audit) office

¶20

¶21

Letter No.PAG (Audit) AP / 2018-19 / ESCAP-3, dated 03.07.2018, as illegal, arbitrary and one without jurisdiction and consequently direct the respondents not to deduct the amounts in respect of construction of proposed 4 Lane ROB and its Approaches in lieu of existing of LC No.75 at km 145/200 (Railway chainage 121/470) on NH-205 in the State of Andhra Pradesh, LC No.67 at km 133/200 (Railway chainage 109/3.4) on NH-205 in the State of Andhra Pradesh and construction of 4 Lane ROB's at Railway KM 44/679 between Putalapatu and RVS Nagar Station of KatpadiPakala Section at KM 12/4 on NH 18 in the State of Andhra Pradesh from the running bills.”

¶22

Today, when the matter came up for hearing, learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the cause in the Writ Petition does not survive for adjudication and the matter has become infructuous.

¶23