Research › Search › Judgment

High Court of Andhra Pradesh · body

2025 DAILYLAW 41793 (AP)

THUNGUNTLA RAJENDRA PRASAD v. THE UNION OF INDIA

WP/25670/2025 · 2025-11-03

Sumathi Jagadam

body2025

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

APHC010498482025 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) [3459] TUESDAY,THE FOURTH DAY OF NOVEMBER TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SMT JUSTICE SUMATHI JAGADAM WRIT PETITION NO: 25670/2025 Between: 1. THUNGUNTLA RAJENDRA PRASAD, AGED ABOUT 50 YEARS, R/O. 69 BALDWIN STREET, SMETHWICK, UNITED KINGDOM. 2. THUNGUNTLA SHRAVAN,, S/O. T. RAJENDRA PRASAD, AGED ABOUT 3 YEARS R/O. 69 BALDWIN STREET, SMETHWICK, UNITED KINGDOM. (PETITIONER NO. 2 ARE THE MINOR REPRESENTED THROUGH THEIR NATURAL FATHER AND GUARDIAN THE PETITIONER NO. 1 HEREIN) ...PETITIONER(S) AND 1. THE UNION OF INDIA, REPRESENTED BY THE SECRETARY, MINISTRY OF HOME AFFAIRS, FOREIGNERS DIVISION, NORTH BLOCK, NEW DELHI-110001. 2. HIGH COMMISSION OF INDIA, REPRESENTED BY CONSULATE GENERAL OF INDIA, HAVING ITS OFFICE AT INDIA HOUSE, 20 AUGUSTA STREET, BIRMINGHAM B18 6JL, UNITED KINGDOM. ...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 a Writ Order or direction, particularly, one in the nature of a writ of Mandamus declaring the action of Respondent No.1 in not disposing of the Revision filed by the petitioner dated 26.12.2024 under Section 15 of the Citizenship Act, 1955. The said action is illegal, arbitrary, 2 JS,J W.P.No.25670/2025 and violative of Articles 14,19, and 21 of the Constitution of India and Consequently,direct the Respondent No.1 to pass appropriate orders or dispose of the revision dated 26.12.2024 filed under Section 15of the Citizenship Act, 1955,as expeditiously as possible and to pass IA NO: 1 OF 2025 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 direct Respondent No.1 to act upon the petitioner's revision dated 26.12.2024,and pass order or orders in accordance with law pending disposal of the above writ petition and to pass Counsel for the Petitioner(S): 1. D TARAKA PRASAD Counsel for the Respondent(S): 1. A RAVINDRA BABU (CENTRAL GOVT COUNSEL) The Court made the following: 3 JS,J W.P.No.25670/2025 ORDER: Heard learned counsel for the petitioners and learned Central Government Counsel representing respondent Nos.1 and 2. 2. Learned counsel for the petitioners and respondent Nos.1 and 2 have agreed for disposal of the writ petition at the admission stage. 3. Recording the submission made by the petitioners, the writ petition is disposed off by directing the respondents to dispose of the Revision dated 26.12.2024, which is pending with the 1st respondent, in accordance with law, within four (04) weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. No order as to costs. As a sequel, interlocutory applications pending, if any, shall stand closed. ___________________________ JUSTICE SUMATHI JAGADAM Date: 04.11.2025 SR 4 JS,J W.P.No.25670/2025 180 THE HONOURABLE SMT JUSTICE SUMATHI JAGADAM WRIT PETITION NO: 25670/2025 Date: 04.11.2025 SR