Research › Search › Judgment

High Court of Andhra Pradesh · body

2025 DAILYLAW 44365 (AP)

BOBBALA SAMBASIVA RAO v. The State of Andhra Pradesh,

WP/3286/2025 · 2025-04-15

Harinath N

body2025

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

? [3457 ] IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH :: AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) WEDNESDAY ,THE SIXTEENTH DAY OF APRIL TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE HARINATH.N WRIT PETITION NO: 3286 OF 2025 Between: 1. Bobbala Sambasiva Rao, S/o.Subba Rao, aged about 61 Properties, resident of Plot No.200, D.No.8-198, Sitapuram colony, Poranki village, Penamaluru Mandal, Krishna District. 2. Smt.Bobbala Pratima, W/o.Venugopala Naidu, aged about 39 Properties, resident of Plot No.36, D.No.8-135, Sitapuram colony, Pornaki village, Penamaluru Mandal, Krishna District. years. years ...PETITIONERS AND 1. The State of Andhra Pradesh,,^ Rep. by its Principal Secretary, Home Department, Secretariat, Velagapudi, Guntur District. 2. The Commissioner of Police,, Vijayawada Urban and Town, Krishna District. 3. The Deputy Commissioner of Police,, Vijayawada, Krishna District. 4. The Station House Office, Gunadala, Vijayawada, Krishna District. 5. Kongara Sai, S/o.Jagan Mohana Rao, Hindu, aged about 52 years, properties resident of D.No.60-20-4, Ashok Nagar, Vijayawada-520 010. ...RESPONDENTS Petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed therewith, the High Court be pleased to issue any appropriate writ, order or direction preferably a writ in the nature of Writ of Mandaums, declaring the high handed action of the respondent in harassing the petitioners calling to the police station and threatening to disposes from their schedule property in an extent of 261.73 sq.yards of TRIPLEX VILLA No.4, constructing of Ground, First and Second floors therein, under name and style of SRIRAMA MURTHY SUKRUTHI in total extent of 5558.39 sq. yards in R.S.No. 123/1, situated at Gunadala, Vijayawada, Krishna District and by handover the same to the 5*^ respondent as being illegal, arbitrary,-without jurisdiction and contrary to law and violative of Art. 14 and 21 of the Constitution of India and consequently directing the 4th respondent not Id harass the petitioners by calling them to the police station regularly and'hot to interfere with the possession and enjoyment of the their respectiVd’'scheduie property in an extent of 261.73 sq.yards of TRIPLEX VILLA No.4, Constructing of Ground, First and Second floors therein, under name and style of SRIRAMA MURTHY SUKRUTHI in total extent of 5558.39 sq. yards in R.S.No. 123/1, situated at Gunadala, Vijayawada, Krishna District. ^ ■ may lA NO: 1 OF 202fi Petition under Section 151 CPC is filed praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed in support of the petition, the High Court may be pleased to directing the 4*^" respondent not to harass the petitioners by calling them to the police station regularly and not to interfere with the possession and enjoyment of the their respective schedule property in an extent of 261.73 sq.yards of TRIPLEX VILLA No.4, constructing of Ground, First and Second floors therein, under name and style of SRIRAMA MURTHY SUKRUTHI in total extent of 5558.39 sq. yards in R.S.No.123/1, situated at Gunadala, Vijayawada, Krishna District. Counsel for the Petitioner(s):SRI. VINODIN RUTH MADAPALLI Counsel for the Respondents: SRI P V A PADMANABHAM Counsel for the Respondents: GP FOR HOME The Court made the following: APHC010062752025 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) WEDNESDAY ,THE SIXTEENTH DAY OF APRIL TWO THOUSANDAND TWENTY FIVE PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE HARINATH.N WRIT PETITION NO: 3286/2025 [3457] Between: Bobbala Sambasiva Rao and Others ...PETITIONER(S) ...RESPONDENT(S) AND The State Of Andhra Pradesh and Others Counsel for the Petitioner(S): 1.VINODIN RUTH MADAPALLI Counsel for the Respondent(S): 1.P VAPADMANABHAM 2.GP FOR HOME The Court made the following Order : The learned counsel appearing for the petitioners seeks the of this Court to withdraw the present writ Petition. permission 2. Permission is accorded. 3. Accordingly, this Writ Petition is dismissed as withdrawn. No costs. As a sequel, miscellaneous petitions pending, if any, shall stand closed. Sd/- U SRI DEVI ASSISTANT ^GISTRAR //TRUE COPY// SECTION OFFICER To, 1. One CC to SRI. VINODIN RUTH MADAPALLI Advocate [OPUC] 2. One CC to SRI. P V A PADMANABHAM Advocate [OPUC] 3. Two CCS to GP FOR HOME vHigh Court Of Andhra Pradesh. [OUT] 4. Three CD Copies gsg f HIGH COURT DATED: 16/04/2025 ORDER 5 11| OCT 2025 I ^^^SPATCtt^s^ V //<s WP.No.3286 of 2025 THE WRIT PETITION IS DISMISSED AS WITHDRAWN WITHOUT COSTS