Research › Search › Judgment

High Court of Andhra Pradesh · body

2026 DAILYLAW 23187 (AP)

PEETALA TATA RAO, VISAKHAPATNAM v. COMMISSIONER, GREATER VIZAG MUNICIPAL CORP., VIZAG & 4 OTHER

WP/11939/2013 · 2026-02-01

Gannamaneni Ramakrishna Prasad

body2026

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

APHC010409352013 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) MONDAY,THE SECOND DAY OF FEBRUARY TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY SIX PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE GANNAMANENI RAMAKRISHNA PRASAD WRIT PETITION NO: 11939 OF 2013 Between: 1. PEETALA TATA RAO, VISAKHAPATNAM, S/o. P.Surya Narayana, Hindu, Aged 55 Years, R/o. H.No. 9-5-45, Pithapuram Colony, Maddipalem, Visakhapatnam. Visakhapatnam District. ...Petitioner AND 1. COMMISSIONER GREATER VIZAG MUNICIPAL CORP VIZAG 4 OTHER, Rep.by The Commissioner, Greater Visakhapatnam Municipal Corporation, Tenneti Bhavan, Ramnagar, Visakhapatnam. 2. The Visakhapatnam Urban Development Authority, Represented by its Chairman, Visakhapatnam. 3. Andhra University Represented by Its Registrar, Visakhapatnam. 4. The Land Acquisition Officer and Spl Deputy Tahasildar, Land Acquisition, Visakhapatnam Municipality, Visakhapatnam. 5. The Mandal Revenue OfficerTahasildar Visakhapatnam, - ...Respondents Counsel for the Petitioner: N M KRISHNAIAH Counsel for the Respondents: GP FOR REVENUE Counsel for the Respondents:SOMISETTY GANESH BABU SC For VUDA and MUDA Counsel for the Respondents:V SAI KUMAR Counsel for the Respondents:. Counsel for the Respondents: 2 The Court made the following ORAL ORDER: Sri S. Vijaya Kumar, learned Counsel appearing on behalf of Sri A.S.C. Bose, learned Standing Counsel for Municipal Corporations and Sri Ganga Kumar, learned Counsel appearing on behalf of Sri V. Sai Kumar, learned Counsel for the Respondent No.3 are present. 2. The Docket indicates that on 28.01.2026, as none appeared for the Writ Petitioner, this Court had directed to list this matter today under the caption ‘For Dismissal’. 3. Today also none appeared for the Writ Petitioner. 4. Having recorded the same, this Writ Petition is dismissed for non- prosecution. No Order as to Costs. 5. Interlocutory Applications, if any, stand closed in terms of this order. ______________________________________ GANNAMANENI RAMAKRISHNA PRASAD, J Dt: 02.02.2026 JKS 3 37 HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE GANNAMANENI RAMAKRISHNA PRASAD WRIT PETITION No. 11939 OF 2013 02.02.2026 JKS