KAKULAPATI VENKATA RAMANA v. THE STATE OF AP
Case at a glance
Outcome
Dismissed
Accordingly, the present Writ Petition is dismissed in terms of the said
Provisions considered
Key paragraphs
- Para 33. Having regard to the above prayer, this Court is of the view that the present case is squarely covered by the Common Order of this Court dated
- Para 44. Accordingly, the present Writ Petition is dismissed in terms of the said Common Order dated 18.08.2025 in W.P.Nos.21413 & 21494 of 2025. No order as to costs.
Judgment
Cause title
THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE GANNAMANENI RAMAKRISHNA PRASAD
WRIT PETITION NO: 21952/2025 Between:
1. KAKULAPATI VENKATA RAMANA, S/O. SRI RAMULU, AGED 50 YEARS, OCC ADVOCATE, PASIVEDALA, KOWUR MANDAL, EAST GODAVARI DIST., ERST WHILE WEST GODAVARI DISTRICT. ...PETITIONER
AND
1. THE STATE OF AP, ,REP. BY ITS PRI. SECRETARY, HOME VELAGAPUDI, DEPARTMENT, SECRETARIAT BUILDINGS, AMARAVATI.
2. 2 THE STATE OF A P, REP. BY ITS SECRETARY, LEGAL AFFAIRS. LEGISLATIVE AFFAIRS JUSTICE DEPARTMENT, SECRETARIAT BUILDINGS, VELAGAPUDI, AMARAVATI
3. THE DIRECTOR OF PROSECUTIONS, 4TH AND 5TH FLOORS, R B ICONIC BUILDING, M.G. ROAD, 0PP. INDIRA GANDHI MUNICIPAL STADIUM, PUNAMMATHOTA, LABBIPET, VIJAYAWADA, A.P.
4. THE COLLECTOR DISTRICT MAGISTRATE, RAJAMAHENDRAVARAM, EAST GODAVARI DISTRICT. ...RESPONDENT(S)
: Counsel for the Petitioner:
1. SIVA RAMA KRISHNA KOLLURU Counsel for the Respondent(S): 2
1. GP FOR HOME
2. GP FOR LAW LEGISLATIVE AFFAIRS The Court made the following:
ORAL ORDER:
Heard Sri Siva Rama Krishna Kolluru, learned Counsel for the Writ Petitioner and Sri M. Srinu Babu, learned Assistant Government Pleader for Law & Legislative Affairs.
The prayer sought in the present Writ Petition is as under:
It is therefore prayed that this Hon’ble Court may be pleased to issue any writ, order or direction more particularly one in the nature of writ of Mandamus declaring G.O.Rt.No.1295 dated 04.08.2025 issued by the 1st respondent as illegal, arbitrary, in violation of Principles of Natural justice and the ratio laid down by the Apex Court in Deepak Ananda Patil Vs. The State of Maharashtra and Ors reported in (2023) 11 SCC 130 Kumari Shrilekha Vidyarthi v. State of U.P. reported in 1991 (1) SCC 212 and Articles 14 and 300-A of the Constitution of India and Consequently set aside the G.O.Rt.No.1295 dt. 04.08.2025 issued by the 1st respondent and direct the respondents to reinstate the Petitioner to the post of Addl. Public Prosecutor for Addl. Assistant Sessions Judge (FTC) Court, Kovvur, East Godavari District, till completion of his tenure i.e., till dt. 31.03.2027, and to pass such other or further orders as this Hon’ble Court may deem fit and proper in the interest of justice.
Having regard to the above prayer, this Court is of the view that the present case is squarely covered by the Common Order of this Court dated
18.08.2025 in W.P.Nos.21413 & 21494 of 2025.
Operative part
Accordingly, the present Writ Petition is dismissed in terms of the said Common Order dated 18.08.2025 in W.P.Nos.21413 & 21494 of 2025. No order as to costs.
Registry is directed to attach a copy of the Common Order dated
18.08.2025 in W.P.Nos.21413 & 21494 of 2025 along with this Order. 3
Interlocutory Applications, if any, stand closed in terms of this order. ______________________________________ GANNAMANENIRAMAKRISHNA PRASAD, J Dt:21.08.2025 DSV 4 147 HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE GANNAMANENI RAMAKRISHNA PRASAD WRIT PETITION NO: 21952/2025
21.08.2025 DSV 5 HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATHI MAIN CASE No. WRIT PETITION NO: 21952/2025 PROCEEDING SHEET Sl. No 01. 21.08.2025 GRKP, J DATE ORDER Office Note Writ Petition is dismissed. (vide separate order) DSV ___________ GRKP, J 6
Questions this judgment answers
What did the Court decide in this case?
The Court recorded the following disposition: Accordingly, the present Writ Petition is dismissed in terms of the said
Which statutory provisions did this judgment involve?
Constitution of India.
Which court decided this case, and when?
Andhra Pradesh High Court, on 21 Aug 2025. The bench was GRKP.
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.