Research › Search › Judgment

High Court of Andhra Pradesh · body

2026 DAILYLAW 2850 (AP)

Smt. M.Sundara Raghavamma v. State of Andhra Pradesh

WP/14317/2026 · 2026-06-14

Tarlada Rajasekhar Rao

body2026

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

APHC010260872026 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) [3330] MONDAY, THE FIFTEENTH DAY OF JUNE TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY SIX PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE TARLADA RAJASEKHAR RAO WRIT PETITION NO: 14317/2026 Between: 1. SMT. M.SUNDARA RAGHAVAMMA, W/O. LATE MANGALAGIRI SINGARAIAH AGED 87 YEARS, OCC HOUSE WIFE, R/O. MALLAVOLU VILLGE, MACHAVARAM MANDAL PALNADU DISTRICT. 522231 A.P. ...PETITIONER AND 1. STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH, REP. BY ITS PRINCIPAL SECRETARY, REVENUE DEPARTMENT. SECRETARIATE VELAGALAPUDI, GUNTUR - 522331 A.P. 2. COLLECTOR AND DISTRICT MAGISTRATE, PALNDU DISTRICT, NARASARAOPET, 522601. A.P. 3. REVENUE DIVISIONAL OFFICER, GURAJALA ,PALNADU DISTRICT PIN 522242 4. TAHSILDAR, MACHAVARAM MANDAL, PALNADU DISTRICT.PIN 522615. 5. SMT M SARADA DEVI, W/O. LATE SAMBASIVA RAO,AGED 53 YEARS, OCC BUSINESS, R/O. SARADA NILAYAM, GODUGU PALEM, NEAR AYYAPPASWAMY TEMPLE,ONGOLE, 523001 6. M KOTESWARARAO, S/O. LATE SINGARAIAH AGED 50 YEARS, OCC CARPENTER, R/O. MALLVOLU VILLAGE, MACHAVARAM MANDAL, PALNADU DISTRICT 522413, A.P. 7. M SRINIVASA RAO, S/O. LATE SINGARAIAH AGED 45 YEARS, OCC GOLD SHOP, R/O. MALLAVOLU VILLAGE, MACHAVARAM MDL., PALNADU DISTRICT 522 413 A.P. 8. STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH, REP. BY ITS PRINCIPAL SECRETARY, WOMEN'S DEVELOPMENT AND CHILD WELFARE DEPARTMEN SECARETARIATE, VELAGAPUDI GUNTU 522331 ...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 a writ, order and direction more 2 particularity one in the nature of writ of Mandamus declaring the impugned order in Rc.No.915/205-E , dt 16-4-2026 of the 3rd respondent in not adjudicating the 2nd limb of prayer of appeal as illegeal, arbitrary without jurisdiction besides violation of article 14 and 21 of the Constitution of India and consequently direct the respondent to adjudicate and decide the 2nd limb of prayer of appeal no.915/2025 ,r by remanding to this limited extent forth with and pass such IA NO: 1 OF 2026 Petition under Section 151 CPC praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed in support of the petition, the High Court may be pleased may be please to direct the 3rd respondent to decide the 2nd limb of prayer in appeal pursuant to impugned proceedings Rc. no.915/2025 dt 16-04-2026 forthwith pending disposal of writ and to pass such Counsel for the Petitioner: 1. J JAYANAND Counsel for the Respondent(S): 1. GP FOR WOMEN DEV CHILD WELFARE 2. GP FOR REVENUE The Court made the following: 3 THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE TARLADA RAJASEKHAR RAO WRIT PETITION No.14317 of 2026 ORDER:- The present Writ Petition is filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India seeking the following relief: “…to issue a writ, order and direction more particularity one in the nature of writ of Mandamus declaring the impugned orders in Rc.No.915/2025-E , dt 16-4-2026 of the 3rd respondent in not adjudicating the 2nd limb of prayer of appeal as illegal, arbitrary, without jurisdiction besides violation of Article 14 and 21 of the Constitution of India and consequently direct the respondents to adjudicate and decide the 2nd limb of prayer of appeal no.915/2025, by remanding to this limited extent forthwith and pass such other order or orders.…” 2. The present writ petition is filed questioning the proceedings vide Rc.No.915/2025-E, dated 16.04.2026, on the file of Revenue Divisional Officer, Gurazala. 3. Heard Sri J.Jayanand, learned counsel for petitioner and learned Assistant Government Pleader appearing on behalf of respondents. 4. After arguing for some time, learned counsel for the petitioner would fairly stated that efficacious alternative remedy is available under Section 16 of the Maintenance and Welfare of the Parents and Senior Citizens Act, 2007 (hereinafter for short ‘the Act’). Learned counsel further submits that the petitioner will avail the alternative remedy, as contemplated under the Act. Therefore, learned counsel 4 requested this Court to permit the petitioner to file an appeal under the Act. 5. In view of the above submissions, the present Writ Petition is disposed of, permitting the petitioner herein to file an appeal within a period of four (04) weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. On filing such appeal, the Appellate Tribunal shall make an endeavour to dispose of the same as expeditiously as possible, in accordance with law and in terms of Section 16(6) of the Act. The order impugned in the Writ Petition is suspended only for a period of four (04) weeks from today. 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: 15.06.2026 Note: Issue C.C. by two days B/o KBN 5 35 THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE TARLADA RAJASEKHAR RAO Writ Petition No.14317 of 2026 15.06.2026 KKBBNN