Research › Search › Judgment

High Court of Andhra Pradesh · body

2025 DAILYLAW 28064 (AP)

B. Trinadhulu, v. The State of Andhra Pradesh,

WP/19214/2019 · 2025-08-29

Venkateswarlu Nimmagadda

body2025

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

APHC010398362019 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) [3329] SATURDAY,THE THIRTIETH DAY OF AUGUST TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE VENKATESWARLU NIMMAGADDA WRIT PETITION NO: 19214/2019 Between: 1. B. TRINADHULU,, S/O LATE RAMI NAIDU, HINDU, AGED ABOUT 52 YEARS, R/O KOTTADEVAKI VADA, RR COLONY, VANGARA MANDALAM, SRIKAKULAM DISTRICT. 2. B. BANGARU NAIDU,, S/O LATE RAMI NAIDU, HINDU, AGED ABOUT 65 YEARS, R/O KOTTADEVAKI VADA, RR COLONY, VANGARA MANDALAM, SRIKAKULAM DISTRICT. 3. B. SIMHACHALAM,, S/O LATE MUSILI NAIDU, HINDU, AGED ABOUT 65 YEARS, R/O KOTTADEVAKI VADA, RR COLONY, VANGARA MANDALAM, SRIKAKULAM DISTRICT. 4. B. RAMAKRISHNA,, S/O LATE TAVITI NAIDU, HINDU, AGED ABOUT 45 YEARS, R/O KOTTADEVAKI VADA, RR COLONY, VANGARA MANDALAM, SRIKAKULAM DISTRICT. 5. B. CHANDRASEKHAR,, S/O JOGI NAIDU, HINDU, AGED 25 YEARS, R/O KOTTADEVAKI VADA, RR COLONY, VANGARA MANDALAM, SRIKAKULAM DISTRICT. 6. KODURU BUCHIM NAIDU,, S/O LATE RAMI NAIDU, HINDU, AGED ABOUT 49 YEARS, RIO KOTTADEVAKI VADA, RR COLONY, VANGARA MANDALAM, SRIKAKULAM DISTRICT. 7. B. APPALA NAIDU,, S/O RAMI NAIDU, HINDU, AGED ABOUT 50 YEARS, R/O KOTTADEVAKI VADA, RR COLONY, VANGARA MANDALAM, SRIKAKULAM DISTRICT. 2 8. B. RAMARAO,, S/O APPALA NAIDU, HINDU, AGED ABOUT 45 YEARS, R/O KOTTADEVAKI VADA, RR COLONY, VANGARA MANDALAM, SRIKAKULAM DISTRICT. 9. B. RAMI NAIDU, S/O NARSAM NAIDU, HINDU, AGED ABOUT 65 YEARS, R/O KOTTADEVAKI VADA, RR COLONY, VANGARA MANDALAM, SRIKAKULAM DISTRICT. 10. B. BALARAM,, S/O NARSAM NAIDU, HINDU, AGED ABOUT 30 YEARS, R/O KOTTADEVAKI VADA, RR COLONY, VANGARA MANDALAM, SRIKAKULAM DISTRICT. 11. B. VENKATRAO,, S/O LATE GOWRI NAIDU, HINDU, AGED ABOUT 32 YEARS, R/O KOTTADEVAKI VADA, RR COLONY, VANGARA MANDALAM, SRIKAKULAM DISTRICT. 12. B. APPALA NARASAMMA,, W/O SIMHACHALAM, HINDU, AGED ABOUT 50 YEARS, R/O KOTTADEVAKI VADA, RR COLONY, VANGARA MANDALAM, SRIKAKULAM DISTRICT. ...PETITIONER(S) AND 1. THE STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH, REP. BY IT'S PRINCIPAL SECRETARY (PR AND RD), SECRETARIAT BUILDING, AMARAVATHI, ANDHRA PRADESH. 2. THE COMMISSIONER, PANCHAYAT RAJ DEPARTMENT, SECRETARIAT, AMARAVATHI, ANDHRA PRADESH. 3. THE DISTRICT COLLECTOR PANCHAYT WING, SRIKAKULAM, ANDHRA PRADESH. 4. THE DISTRICT PANCHAYAT OFFICER, SRIKAKULAM, ANDHRA PRADESH. 5. THE DIVISIONAL PANCHAYAT OFFICER, PALAKONDA, PALAKONDA DIVISION, SRIKAKULAM DISTRICT. 6. THE CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER, ZILLA PARISHAT, SRIKAKULAM DISTRICT. 7. THE MANDAL DEVELOPMENT OFFICER, VANGARA MANDALAM, SRIKAKULAM DISTRICT. 3 8. KINGAGI GRAM PANCHAYAT, REP. BY IT'S PANCHAYAT SECRETARY CUM SPECIAL OFFICER, VANGARA MANDALAM, SRIKAKULAM 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 toissue a WRIT of MANDAMUS or any other appropriate Writ, Order or Direction a)to declare the inaction of respondents in considering the recommendations of Respondent Nos. 3 and 5 in their proceedings RC No. 25/49 dated 09.04.2019 and RC No. 122/2017 dated 18.12.017 to re-organise the original Devakivada gram panchayat as Kotta Devakivada gram panchayat, R.R. colony, Vangara Mandalam as per section 3 (2) (e) of AP Panchayat Raj Act, 1994 read with Rule 12 (1) of AP Gram Panchayats (Declaration/Denotification/Constitution of villages) Rules, 2007 as illegal, arbitray, discriminatory and unconstitutional to declare the proceedings dated 10.05.2019 in RC No. 2361/2017.P1 issued by the 4th Respondent in including the entire voters list of Kotta Devakiwada, R. R. Colony, covered by polling booth No. 24 from Serial No. 1225 to 1804 in the voters list of Kingangi Gram Panchayat, Vangara mandalam, without Denotify/re-organise the original Devakiwada Gram Panchayat under the provisions of AP Panchayat Raj Act, 1994 and the rules made there under, is illegal, arbitrary, discriminatory and unconstitutional as also contrary to the recommendations of Respondent No. 3 and 5 in their proceedings RC No. 25/49 dated 09.04.2019 and RC No. 122/2017 dated 18.12.017 and iii)consequently, command the respondents to notify 'Kotta Devakiwada Gram Panchayat, R R Colony, Vangara Mandalam, Srikakulam District' as 'Kotta Devakiwada Gram Panchayat' forthwith in the interest of justice and in the circumstances of the case. IA NO: 1 OF 2019 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 respondent Nos 1 and 2 to consider the recommendations of Respondent Nos. 3 and 5 in their proceedings RC No. 25/49 dated 09.04.2018 and RC No. 122/2017 dated 18.12.017 to re-organise the original 'Devakivada gram panchayat' as 'Kotta Devakivada gram panchayat, R.R. colony, Vangara Mandalam' as per section 3 (2) (e) of AP Panchayat Raj Act, 1994 read with Rule 12 (1) of AP Gram Panchayats 4 (Declaration/Denotification/Constitution of villages) Rules, 2007, in the interest of Justice and in the circumstances of the case and pass IA NO: 1 OF 2023 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 grant leave to the petitioner herein/ respondent No. 8 in WP no. 19214 of 2019 to file counter affidavit in the above writ petition and pass Counsel for the Petitioner(S): 1. P RAJASEKHAR Counsel for the Respondent(S): 1. N SRIHARI (Standing Counsel for ZPP MPP and GRAM PANCHAYAT) 2. . 3. GP FOR PANCHAYAT RAJ RURAL DEV (AP) The Court made the following: 5 THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE VENKATESWARLU NIMMAGADDA WRIT PETITION NO: 19214/2019 ORDER: Mr. Ravi Teja, learned counsel for the petitioners, submits that the cause in the writ petition does not survive for adjudication and hence, the writ petition becomes infructuous. In view of the above, the Writ Petition is dismissed as infructuous. As a sequel, miscellaneous petitions, if any, pending shall stand closed. ________________________________ VENKATESWARLU NIMMAGADDA, J Dt: 30.08.2025 SSRR 6 HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE VENKATESWARLU NIMMAGADDA WRIT PETITION NO: 19214/2019 Dt: 30.08.2025 SSRR