NELLORE DISTRICT v. DISTRICT
Case at a glance
Outcome
Dismissed
Accordingly, the Writ Petition is dismissed as infructuous
Provisions considered
- Constitution of India art. 226
- Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 s. 151
Judgment
Cause title
1. SRI JHOGI SIVAKUMAR, S/O. SUBBARAMAIAH AGED ABOUT 51 YEARS, R/O. D.NO.11-402-13, ASHOK NAGAR, GUDUR, SPSR NELLORE DISTRICT. ...PETITIONER
AND
1. STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH, REP BY ITS REP BY ITS PRINCIPAL SECRETARY SECRETARIAT (REVENUE-ASSIGNMENT), BUILDINGS, VELAGAPUDI, GUNTUR DISTRICT.
2. THE DISTRICT COLLECTOR, SPSR NELLORE DISTRICT, NELLORE.
3. THE EXECUTIVE ENGINEER, ROADS AND BUILDINGS DEPARTMENT, GUDUR DIVISION, GUDUR, SPSR NELLORE DISTRICT.
4. THE TAHSILDAR, GUDUR MANDAL, GUDUR, SPSR NELLORE 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 to declare the action of the respondent 2 to 4 in not considering petitioners request for allotment of alternative land in Sy.No.85/A1B for mistakenly laying approach road on his patta land situated in Sy.No.85/A1A even though the joint inspection report confirmed the same, vide Lr. No. 916/ATO/R&B Approach Road/2017 dt. 14.05.2018, as illegal, arbitrary, unjust 2 and violative of Article 300 A of Constitution of India by issuing appropriate writ, order or direction more particularly in the nature of MANDAMUS and direct the respondents 2 to 4 to immediately consider the request of the petitioner for allotment of land in Sy.No. 85/A1B of West Gudur Village, Gudur Mandal, SPSR Nellore District, and pass IA NO: 1 OF 2018 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 to direct the respondents 2 and 3 to consider the representations of the petitioner dt. 4.11.2018 for allotment order in respect of land in Sy.No.85/A1B of West Gudur Village, Gudur Mandal, SPSR Nellore District, pending disposal of the above Writ Petition and pass Counsel for the Petitioner:
1. SRINIVAS KARRA Counsel for the Respondent(S):
1. GP FOR REVENUE (AP)
2. GP FOR ROADS BUILDINGS (AP) 3 The Court made the following
ORDER :
Operative part
No representation for the petitioner. During the course of hearing, the learned Assistant Government Pleader submits that the District Revenue Officer, Gudur Mandal, has conducted a detailed enquiry and rejected the case of the petitioner vide orders in Rc.No.E3/3895/2019, dated 10.09.2020. In view of the same, the cause in the present writ petition does not survive for consideration. Accordingly, the Writ Petition is dismissed as infructuous. There shall be no order as to costs. As a sequel, miscellaneous applications pending, if any, shall stand closed. _________________________ JUSTICE SUMATHI JAGADAM Dated: 06.03.2026 CMK 4 113 THE HONOURABLE SMT JUSTICE SUMATHI JAGADAM WRIT PETITION NO: 45497 of 2018 Dated : 06.03.2026 CMK
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 infructuous
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 06 Mar 2026. The bench was SUMATHI JAGADAM.
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.