Research › Search › Judgment

High Court of Andhra Pradesh · body

2025 DAILYLAW 4932 (AP)

DODDI LAKSHMI BHARATHI v. THE STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH

WP/2044/2025 · 2025-01-29

Gannamaneni Ramakrishna Prasad

body2025

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

1 APHC010040392025 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) [3328] WEDNESDAY ,THE TWENTY NINETH DAY OF JANUARY TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE GANNAMANENI RAMAKRISHNA PRASAD WRIT PETITION NO: 2044/2025 Between: 1. DODDI LAKSHMI BHARATHI, W/O DODDI SIVA SANYASI RAO, HINDU, AGED 38 YEARS, HOUSEWIFE, R/O DOOR NO. 22-100, GAVERAPETA, KASIMKOTA VILLAGE, KASIMKOTA MANDAL, DISTRICT VISAKHAPATNAM. ...PETITIONER AND 1. THE STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH, REP BY ITS PRINCIPAL SECRETARY, REVENUE DEPARTMENT, VELAGAPUDI SECRETARIAT 2ND BLOCK, TULLURU MANDAL, GUNTUR DISTRICT. 2. THE DISTRICT COLLECTOR, ANAKAPALLI DISTRICT. 3. THE TAHSILDAR, KASIMKOTA MANDAL, ANAKAPALLI DISTRICT. 4. THE STATION HOUSE OFFICER, KASIMKOTA POLICE STATION, KASIMKOTA, ANAKAPALLI DISTRICT. ...RESPONDENT(S): Counsel for the Petitioner: 1. RAVI TEJA DOMMETI Counsel for the Respondent(S): 1. GP FOR HOME 2. GP FOR REVENUE 2 The Court made the following: ORAL ORDER: Heard Sri B. Parameswara Rao, learned Counsel appearing on behalf of Sri Ravi Teja Dommeti, learned Counsel for the Writ Petitioner and Sri K. Arjun Chowdhary, learned Assistant Government Pleader for Revenue. 2. The facts in this case would indicate that the Writ Petitioner has submitted Applications on 20.01.2025 & 22.01.2025. This Writ Petition is filed within two days after the submission of the first Representation and one day after the second Representation. This is nothing but an abuse of process. Without even waiting for the outcome with regard to the Representations/Applications, the present Writ Petition has been filed. The facts of this case would indicate that the present Writ Petition is premature in nature besides being an abuse of process. 3. Although this Writ Petition deserves imposing of exemplary costs for resorting to an abuse of process, since the learned Counsel for the Writ Petitioner has made a request at the very inception, this Court has desisted from imposing the costs. 4. Writ Petition is dismissed as withdrawn with liberty to file fresh Writ Petition whenever there is a proper cause of action. No order as to costs. 5. Interlocutory Applications, if any, stand closed in terms of this order. _________________________________ GANNAMANENI RAMAKRISHNA PRASAD, J Dt: 29.01.2025 Vns