Dismissed¶27

Chekkara Gari Rama Krishna Reddy v. the State of Ap

Andhra Pradesh HC8 Apr 2026WP/8518/2026

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Writ Petition dismissed as withdrawn; withdrawal of writ petition; W.P. No. 8518/2026; High Court of Andhra Pradesh at Amaravati; Chekkara Gari Rama Krishna Reddy; State of AP Principal Secretary Municipal Administration; District Collector Kurnool; Kurnool Municipal Corporation; Milk Parlour Shop disputed premises; tin sheet shed removal; affidavit to vacate premises; order dated 07.04.2026; Justice Gannamaneni Ramakrishna Prasad; decided 09.04.2026; no order as to costs; interlocutory applications closed.

What did the court decide?

Permission to withdraw the Writ Petition; dismissed as withdrawn with no order as to costs; Interlocutory Applications, if any, closed. ¶27

Chekkara Gari Rama Krishna Reddy Vs the State of Ap — Andhra Pradesh HC (2026) — LawSathi Research

¶1

[3328]

¶2

APHC010164742026

¶3

IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI

¶4

(Special Original Jurisdiction)

¶5

THURSDAY,THE NINTH DAY OF APRIL TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY SIX

¶6

PRESENT

¶7

THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE GANNAMANENI RAMAKRISHNA PRASAD

¶8

WRIT PETITION NO: 8518/2026

¶9

Between:

¶10

CHEKKARA GARI RAMA KRISHNA REDDY, S/O. CHEKKARAGARI RAMAGOPAL REDDY, AGED ABOUT 46 YEARS, R/O. D. NO. 46/1F1 (2), SANJAY GANDHE NAGAR, MEDICAL COLLEGE POST KURNOOL TOWN AND DISTRICT. -518001

¶11

...PETITIONER

¶12

AND

¶13

THE STATE OF AP, REP. BY ITS PRINCIPAL SECRETARY, MUNICIPAL ADMINISTRATION DEPARTMENT, SECRETARIAT BUILDINGS, VELAGAPUDI, GUNTUR DISTRICT.-522238

¶14

THE DISTRICT COLLECTOR, KURNOOL, KURNOOL DISTRICT. - 518001

¶15

THE KURNOOL MUNICIPAL CORPORATION, REP. BY ITS COMMISSIONER, KURNOOL TOWN AND DISTRICT.-518001-

¶16

...RESPONDENT(S):

¶17

Counsel for the Petitioner:

¶18

1.P NARASIMHULU

¶19

Counsel for the Respondent(S):

¶20

1.POTHAM VENGALA REDDY SC FOR M.CORPORATION IN RAYALASEEMA REGION IN

¶21

2.GP MUNCIPAL ADMN AND URBAN DEV AP

¶22

The Court made the following:

¶23

ORAL ORDER:

¶24

Sri D.N.V. Rathna Prakash, learned Counsel representing Sri P. Narasimhulu, learned Counsel for the Writ Petitioner, on instructions, seeks to withdraw this Writ Petition.

¶25

It is noticed by this Court that this Court, vide Order dated 07.04.2026, had directed the Petitioner to file an Affidavit stating that he would vacate the disputed premises, i.e., the Milk Parlour Shop, and indicating the removal of the tin sheet shed within ten days.

¶26

However, since the Petitioner does not want to prosecute the Writ Petition and wants to withdraw the same, this Court deems it appropriate to grant permission.

¶27