The Trust Association of the Convention of… — Writ and Judicial Review | Andhra Pradesh HC (2026)

The Trust Association of the Convention of… — Writ and Judicial Review | Andhra Pradesh HC (2026)

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

Permission to withdraw the writ petition granted; writ petition dismissed as withdrawn; no order as to costs; pending interlocutory applications closed.

Issue for consideration

Whether the Award of Transferable Development Right (TDR-No.1086/00061/TDR/WTW/2022 dated 29.10.2022) issued by Respondent No.3 (GVMC) in favour of Respondent No.4 is illegal, arbitrary, without jurisdiction and fraudulent and violative of Articles 14, 21 and 300-A of the Constitution of India - raised in the writ petition but not adjudicated, as the petition was permitted to be withdrawn.

Ratio / Principle

Permission is accorded to the petitioners to withdraw the writ petition, as sought by learned counsel for the petitioners at the hearing.

Key takeaways

The Writ Petition is dismissed as withdrawn, with no order as to costs.ratio¶64
As a sequel, pending interlocutory applications, if any, shall stand closed.ratio¶65

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Writ Petition No. 8508 of 2023, High Court of Andhra Pradesh at Amaravati (Special Original Jurisdiction); Coram: Cheekati Manavendranath Roy and Tuhin Kumar Gedela, JJ.; order per Roy, J.; decided 02.03.2026. Petition under Article 226 by the Trust Association of the Convention of the Baptist Churches of the Northern Circars (Reg. No. 12/1960) through its Chairman Dasari Yacob, challenging as illegal, arbitrary, without jurisdiction and fraudulent, and as violative of Articles 14, 21 and 300-A of the Constitution of India, the Award of Transferable Development Right vide TDR-No.1086/00061/TDR/WTW/2022 dated 29.10.2022 issued by Respondent No.3 (Greater Visakhapatnam Municipal Corporation) in favour of Respondent No.4 (Dinakar Thyagaraj); IA No. 1 of 2023 under Section 151 CPC sought suspension of the award. On the date of hearing, learned counsel for the petitioners sought permission to withdraw the writ petition; permission was accorded; the writ petition was dismissed as withdrawn with no order as to costs; pending interlocutory applications stood closed. No findings were rendered on the merits of the challenge to the TDR award.

Parties & counsel

AI extract

petitioner
THE TRUST ASSOCIATION OF THE CONVENTION OF THE BAPTIST CHURCHES OF THE NORTHERN CIRCARS, REG. NO. 12/1960, REP. BY ITS CHAIRMAN DASARI YACOB¶9
P SRI RAM
petitioner
DASARI YACOB, S/O. MOSES, AGED 58 YEARS, OCC. CHAIRMAN, THE TRUST ASSOCIATION OF THE CONVENTION OF THE BAPTIST CHURCHES OF THE NORTHERN CIRCARS¶10
P SRI RAM
respondent
THE STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH, REP. BY ITS PRINCIPAL SECRETARY, DEPARTMENT OF MUNICIPAL ADMINISTRATION & URBAN DEVELOPMENT, SECRETARIAT BUILDINGS, VELAGAPUDI, AMARAVATHI, GUNTUR DISTRICT¶13
GP FOR MUNCIPAL ADMN URBAN DEV
respondent
THE DISTRICT COLLECTOR, VISAKHAPATNAM DISTRICT, VISAKHAPATNAM¶14
GP FOR REVENUE
respondent
GREATER VISAKHAPATNAM MUNICIPAL CORPORATION, REP. BY ITS COMMISSIONER, VISAKHAPATNAM¶15
K.MADHAVA REDDY
respondent
MR DINAKAR THYAGARAJ, S/O. HEMAN RATNAKAR THYAGARAJU, AGED 49 YEARS¶16
V V RAVI PRASAD, PILLIX LAW FIRM
respondent
M/S H R R CONSTRUCTION PRIVATE LIMITED, REP. BY ITS DIRECTOR SMT. JENET MALINI THYAGARAJ¶20
respondent
M/S RAMASHIL CONSTRUCTIONS PRIVATE LIMITED, REP. BY ITS DIRECTOR SMT. JENET MALINI THYAGARAJ¶21
respondent
M/S SHIMANI CONSTRUCTIONS PRIVATE LIMITED, REP. BY ITS DIRECTOR SMT. JENETMALINITHYAGARAI¶22
respondent
FINE SHINE DEVELOPERS PRIVATE LIMITED, REP. BY ITS DIRECTOR SMT. JENETMALINITHYAGARAJ¶23
respondent
M/S ANIRAGH CONSTRUCTION PRIVATE LIMITED, REP. BY ITS DIRECTOR SMT. JENETMALINITHYAGARAJ¶24
respondent
M/S H R S CONSTRUCTION PRIVATE LIMITED, REP. BY ITS DIRECTOR SMT. JENETMALINITHYAGARAJ¶25
respondent
M/S JAISHIL CONSTRUCTION PRIVATE LIMITED, REP. BY ITS DIRECTOR SMT. JENETMALINITHYAGARAJ¶26
respondent
M/S H N P CONSTRUCTION PRIVATE LIMITED, REP. BY ITS DIRECTOR SMT. JENETMALINITHYAGARAJ¶30
respondent
M/S H B J CONSTRUCTION PRIVATE LIMITED, REP. BY ITS DIRECTOR SMT. JENETMALINITHYAGARAJ¶31
respondent
M/S SOWDAMINI CONSTRUCTION PRIVATE LIMITED, REP. BY ITS DIRECTOR SMT. JENETMALINITHYAGARAJ¶32
respondent
M/S SEEMA CONSTRUCTIONS PRIVATE LIMITED, REP. BY ITS DIRECTOR SMT. SEEMA REDDY THYAGARAJ¶33
respondent
M/S JENET PROPERTY DEVELOPERS PRIVATE LIMITED, REP. BY ITS DIRECTOR SMT. JENETMALINITHYAGARAJ¶34
respondent
M/S JYOSTNA ESTATES PRIVATE LIMITED, REP. BY ITS DIRECTOR HEMANRATNAKARTHYAGARAJU¶35
respondent
M/S TYAGARAJ CONSTRUCTIONS PRIVATE LIMITED, REP. BY ITS DIRECTOR HEMANRATNAKARTHYAGARAJU¶36
respondent
M/S CHRISTINA CONSTRUCTIONS PRIVATE LIMITED, REP. BY ITS DIRECTOR HEMANRATNAKARTHYAGARAJU¶40
respondent
M/S CHINTAKUNTA CONSTRUCTIONS PRIVATE LIMITED, REP. BY ITS DIRECTOR SMT. SEEMA REDDY THYAGARAJ¶41
respondent
M/S DINAKAR CONSTRUCTIONS PRIVATE LIMITED, REP. BY ITS DIRECTOR D. DINAKAR THYAGARAJ¶42
respondent
M/S SUNITHA ESTATES PVT LTD, REP. BY ITS DIRECTOR CHRISTOPHER KARUNAKAR THYAGARAJ¶43

Coram

AI extract

Justice Cheekati Manavendranath Royauthor¶61
Justice Tuhin Kumar Gedelamember¶67