Research › Search › Judgment

High Court of Andhra Pradesh · body

2026 DAILYLAW 23213 (AP)

T. Doraswamy Naidu v. Tirumala Tirupati Devasthanams Trust Board

WP/827/2013 · 2026-03-09

Ninala Jayasurya

body2026

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

APHC010413232013 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) [3209] TUESDAY, THE TENTH DAY OF MARCH TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY SIX PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE NINALA JAYASURYA WRIT PETITION NO: 827/2013 Between: 1. T. DORASWAMY NAIDU, S/O T. VENKATARAMA NAIDU, HINDU, AGED ABOUT 69 YEARS, R/O SHOP NO 1, IN FRONT OF 'IND NEW CHOULTRY, NEAR CRO OFFICE, TIRUMALA, CHITTOOR DISTRICT. 2. JABU DEVI, W/O KUMAR, HINDU, AGED ABOUT 26 YEARS, R/O SHOP NO 3, IN FRONT OF IIND NEW CHOULTRY, NEAR CRO OFFICE, TIRUMALA, CHITTOOR DISTRICT. 3. CHINTALA LAXMAIAH, S/O LATE C. VENKATESWARA RAO, HINDU, AGED ABOUT 49 YEARS, R/O SHOP NO 5, IN FRONT OF IIND NEW CHOULTRY, NEAR CRO OFFICE, TIRUMALA, CHITTOOR DISTRICT. ...PETITIONER(S) AND 1. TIRUMALA TIRUPATI DEVASTHANAMS TRUST BOARD, REP. BY ITS CHAIRMAN, TIRUPATI, CHITTOOR DIST.. 2. THE TIRUMALA TIRUPATI DEVASTHANAMS, REP BY ITS EXECUTIVE OFFICER, TIRUPATI, CHITTOOR DISTRICT. 3. THE JOINT EXECUTIVE OFFICER, TIRUMALA TIRUPATHI DEVASTHANAMS TIRUMALA, CHITTOOR DISTRICT 4. THE HEALTH OFFICER, TIRUMALA TIRUPATHI DEVASTHANAMS TIRUMALA, CHITTOOR DISTRICT 5. P VENKATARATNAM, FATHER'S NAME NOT KNOWN TO THE PETITIONERS PUSH CART BUNK NO 4, IN FRONT OF IIND NEW NJS,J W.P No.827 of 2013 2 CHOULTRY, NEAR CRO OFFICE, TIRUMALA, CHITTOOR DISTRICT. ...RESPONDENT(S): Counsel for the Petitioner(S): 1. A CHANDRAIH NAIDU Counsel for the Respondent(S): 1. C M R VELU 2. V R N PRASHANTH 3. P R K AMERANDRA KUMAR NJS,J W.P No.827 of 2013 3 The Court made the following Order: Mr. N V S Prasada Varma, learned Standing Counsel appeared on behalf of the T.T.D. 2. Mr. P Niranjan Reddy, learned counsel representing the learned counsel for the petitioners, states that the cause in the writ petition does not survive and the matter has become infructuous. 3. In view of the same, the Writ Petition is dismissed as infructuous. Interim orders, if any, granted on the earlier occasion shall stand dissolved. No costs. Miscellaneous petitions pending, if any, shall stand closed. __________________________ JUSTICE NINALA JAYASURYA Date:10.03.2026 Ksj