Research › Search › Judgment

High Court of Andhra Pradesh · body

2026 DAILYLAW 24375 (AP)

U.N.L Sailaja v. The State of Andhra Pradesh

WP/23448/2018 · 2026-01-01

Tarlada Rajasekhar Rao

body2026

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

APHC010492602018 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) [3330] FRIDAY, THE SECOND DAY OF JANUARY TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY SIX PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE TARLADA RAJASEKHAR RAO WRIT PETITION No.23448 of 2018 Between: 1. U.N.L SAILAJA, W/O, CHANDRASHEKAR AGED ABOUT 50 YEARS, OCC. ADVOCATE R/O. PLOT NO. 494, P.N. COLONY, SRIKAKULAM, SRIKAKULAM DISTRICT, ANDHRA PRADESH. ...PETITIONER AND 1. THE STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH, REP.BY ITS PRINCIPAL SECRETARY PR AND RD DEPARTMENT, SECRETARIAT BUILDINGS, THULLUR MANDAL, AMARAVATHI GUNTUR DISTRICT. (A.P.) 2. THE PRINCIPAL SECRETARY FINANCE DEPARTMENT, SECRETARIAT BUILDINGS, THULLUR MANDAL, AMARAVATHI GUNTUR DISTRICT. (A.P.) 3. THE PAY AND ACCOUNTS OFFICER, SRIKAKULAM ANDHRA PRADESH. 4. THE EXECUTIVE ENGINEER PANCHAYAT RAJ DEPARTMENT, SRIKAKULAM ANDHRA PRADESH ANDHRA PRADESH ...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 to issue an appropriate writ, order or direction more particularly one in the nature of WRIT OF MANDAMUS declaring the respondent No. 2 and 3 stopping bill for wanton QC certificate , which is illegal arbitrary and unconstitutional and consequently direct the respondents 2 and 3 to pay 12,42,843/-(including deposit) with 24 Percent of interest from the date of final recording of bill immediately, and respondent No 1 and 4 to take action for resubmit the bill with interest for immediate payment. 2 Counsel for the Petitioner: 1. CHIMAKURTHI CHANDRASEKHAR Counsel for the Respondent(S): 1. GP FOR FINANCE PLANNING (AP) 2. GP FOR PANCHAYAT RAJ RURAL DEV (AP) The Court made the following: 3 ORDER: Though the matter is listed under the caption “For Dismissal”, there is no representation on behalf of the petitioner. It evinces that the petitioner has no interest in prosecuting the case. Therefore, the present Writ Petition is dismissed for non- prosecution. There shall be no order as to costs. As a sequel thereto, Interlocutory Applications pending, if any, shall stand closed. __________________________________ JUSTICE TARLADA RAJASEKHAR RAO Date: 02.01.2026 Siva/CMK 4 THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE TARLADA RAJASEKHAR RAO WRIT PETITION No.23448 of 2018 Date: 02.01.2026 Siva/CMK