Research › Search › Judgment

High Court of Andhra Pradesh · body

2026 DAILYLAW 3685 (AP)

B. Jayalakshmamma v. The state of Andhra Pradesh

WP/16147/2026 · 2026-06-23

B S Bhanumathi

body2026

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

Date of reserved for orders : - Date of pronouncement : 24.06.2026 Date of uploading : 01.07.2026 APHC010298732026 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) [3311] Wednesday, the 24th day of June, 2026 Present The Honourable Ms. Justice B. S. Bhanumathi Writ Petition No: 16147 of 2026 Between: B. Jayalakshmamma ...Petitioner and The State of Andhra Pradesh and others ...Respondents Counsel for the petitioner: 1. S. Krishna Reddy Counsel for the respondents: 1. G.P. for revenue The Court made the following: 2 BSB,J W.P.No.16147 of 2026 ORDER: The writ petition is filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, seeking the following relief: “…to issue an appropriate writ, order or direction more particularly one in the nature of writ of mandamus, declaring the action of the respondents particularly the respondent No. 4 in interfering in the civil dispute and in directing the petitioner not to enter into the land admeasuring Ac. 3.48 cents out of Ac. 10.28 cents in Sy. No. 273 of Roddam Revenue Village and Mandal, Sri Sathya Sai District for cultivation purpose and threatening her to dispossess from the subject land as arbitrary, illegal, unwarranted, unconstitutional and in violation of Article 14, 21 and 300-A of the Constitution of India and consequently direct the respondents Nos. 4 and 5 not to interfere with peaceful possession of the petition from the subject land and to pass…” 2. Sri G. Divyatheja, learned Assistant Government Pleader for Revenue, placed on record a copy of written instructions of the respondent No. 4 vide Rc.No.165/2025.A, dated 18.06.2026. 3. In the written instructions, after stating about the material facts of the case, it was stated that no notice had been given to the petitioner by the respondent No. 4 or from his office to attend before any authority and that the petitioner had not been threatened by the respondent No. 4 or any person from his office nor was he dispossessed. 4. In view of the above said instructions, learned counsel for the petitioner requested to dispose of the writ petition recording the statements made in the written instructions. 3 BSB,J W.P.No.16147 of 2026 5. Accordingly, recording the statements made in the written instructions, the writ petition is disposed of. Pending miscellaneous applications, if any, shall stand closed. ________________________ JUSTICE B.S. BHANUMATHI Dated: 24.06.2026 NSM Whether the order is: Speaking Recorded Reportable Non-reportable 4 BSB,J W.P.No.16147 of 2026 103 The Honourable Ms. Justice B.S.Bhanumathi Writ Petition No: 16147 of 2026 Dated: 24.06.2026 NSM