SIDDU BRAHMANANDA REDDY v. THE STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH, REP., BY ITS PRINCIPAL
Case at a glance
Outcome
Withdrawn
Accordingly, the Writ Petition is dismissed as withdrawn
Provisions considered
- Constitution of India art. 226
- Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 s. 151
Judgment
Cause title
THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE SUBBA REDDY SATTI
WRIT PETITION NO: 15609/2024 Between:
1. SIDDU BRAHMANANDA REDDY,, S/O. GURIVI REDDY, AGED R/O. OCC. POST, VILLAGE, ABOUT CHENNAREDDYPETA PORUMAMILLA MANDAL, Y.S.R DISTRICT. AGRICULTURE, BOPPAPURAM YEARS, 38
2. S.SADA SIVANANDA REDDY,, S/O. GURIVI REDDY, AGED ABOUT R/O. CHENNAREDDYPETA 36 YEARS, OCC AGRICULTURE, VILLAGE, BOPPAPURAM POST, PORUMAMILLA MANDAL, Y.S.R DISTRICT.
3. S. RAJASEKHAR REDDY,, S/O. GURIVI REDDY, AGED ABOUT 34 YEARS, OCC AGRICULTURE, R/O. CHENNAREDDYPETA VILLAGE, BOPPAPURAM POST, PORUMAMILLA MANDAL, Y.S.R DISTRICT.
4. S.VENKATA SPANDANA,, W/O. RAJSEKHAR REDDY, AGED ABOUT R/O. CHENNAREDYPETA, 32 YEARS, OCC AGRICULTURE, BOPPAPURAM POST, PORUMAMILLA MANDAL, Y.S.R DISTRICT.
5. S.GURIVI REDDY,, S/O. GURIVI REDDY AGED ABOUT 58 YEARS, OCC AGRICULTURE, R/O. CHENNAREDDYPETA, BOPPAPURAM POST, POURMAMILLA MANDAL, Y.S.R DISTIRCT. ...PETITIONER(S)
AND
1. THE STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH, REP., BY ITS PRINCIPAL SECRETARIAT REVENUE DEPARTMENT, SECRETARY, BUILDINGS, VELAGAPUDI, AMARAVATHI, GUNTUR DISTRICT.
2. THE DISTRICT COLLECTOR, Y.S.R DISTRICT, KADAPA.
3. THE JOINT COLLECTOR, KADAPA, Y.S.R DISTRICT.
4. THE REVENUE DIVISIONAL OFFICER, BADVEL, Y.S.R DISTRICT.
5. THE TAHSILDAR, PORUMAMILLA MANDAL, Y.S.R DISTRICT.
6. THE ANDHRA PRADESH LOKAYUKTHA, REP BY ITS REGISTRAR, ROOM NO.2, A P STATE GUEST HOUSE, DHAMMAPET KUMOOL, KUMOOL DISTRICT. ...RESPONDENT(S)
: 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 topleased to issue an appropriate Writ, Order or direction more particularly one in nature of Writ of Mandamus declaring the Order in D.Dis. Case No. 136/2022, dated 22.02.2023 passed by the respondent No.4 deleting the entries in the Web land for the land in an extent of Ac.0.70 cents in Sy.No.63-4A, Ac.0.80 cents in Sy.No.63-5B, Ac.2.00 cents in Sy.No.68-1, Ac.2.00 cents in Sy.No.68-2, Ac.3.55 cents in Sy.No.70/1, Ac.2.34 cents in Sy.No.71/1 and Ac.6.00 cents in Sy.No.72-2 of Chennareddypeta, Porumamilla Mandal, Y.S.R District and the land in an extent of Ac.2.30 cents in Sy.No.265/2 and Ac.2.00 cents in Sy.No.266/1 of Boppapuram Village, Porumamilla Mandal, Y.S.R District updated in favour of the petitioners, during subsistence of the DKT Patta and the Pattadar Pass Books and Title Deeds granted in favour of the petitioners as arbitrary, illegal, contrary to the well established legal principles apart from being violative of the fundamental and Constitutional rights guaranteed to them under Articles 14, 19, 21 and 300-A of the Constitution of India and consequently setaside the same IA NO: 1 OF 2024 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 suspend the Order in D.Dis. Case No. 136/2022, dated 22.02.2023 passed by the respondent No.4, pending disposal of the above Writ Petition Counsel for the Petitioner(S):
1. V R REDDY KOVVURI Counsel for the Respondent(S):
1. GP FOR REVENUE The Court made the following
ORDER:
Operative part
Learned counsel for the petitioners seeks permission to withdraw the present writ petition. Permission is accorded. Accordingly, the Writ Petition is dismissed as withdrawn. No order as to costs. Miscellaneous petitions pending, if any, shall stand closed. Date: 24.07.2025 IKN _____________________ SUBBA REDDY SATTI, J THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE SUBBA REDDY SATTI WRIT PETITION NO: 15609 of 2024 Date: 24.07.2025 IKN
Questions this judgment answers
What did the Court decide in this case?
The Court recorded the following disposition: Accordingly, the Writ Petition is dismissed as withdrawn
Which statutory provisions did this judgment involve?
Constitution of India — art. 226; Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 — s. 151.
Which court decided this case, and when?
Andhra Pradesh High Court, on 24 Jul 2025. The bench was SUBBA REDDY SATTI.
Precedent status how later indexed judgments have treated this case
No known negative treatment found in the Courts & Cases corpus.
This is a result about the indexed corpus, not a finding that the judgment remains good law. Coverage may be incomplete.