Research › Search › Judgment

High Court of Andhra Pradesh · body

2026 DAILYLAW 843 (AP)

MAJJURI VENKATA SUBBAIAH v. The State of Andhra Pradesh

WP/6183/2026 · 2026-04-19

Gannamaneni Ramakrishna Prasad

Transfer Petitionbody2026

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

APHC010110972026 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) [3328] MONDAY,THE TWENTIETH DAY OF APRIL TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY SIX PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE GANNAMANENI RAMAKRISHNA PRASAD WRIT PETITION NO: 6183/2026 Between: 1. MAJJURI VENKATA SUBBAIAH, S/O. M.CHINNAPPA AGED ABOUT 65 YEARS, OCC. CONTRACTOR, RESIDENT OF D.NO.81/121, PALAMPALLI KADAPA, Y.S.R DISTRICT. ...PETITIONER AND 1. THE STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH, REP. BY ITS PRINCIPAL SECRETARY, MUNICIPAL ADMINISTRATION AND URBAN DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT, SECRETARIAT BUILDINGS, VELAGAPUDI, GUNTUR DISTRICT, 522237. 2. THE STATP OF ANDHRA PRADESH, REP. BY ITS PRINCIPAL SECRETARY, FINANCE DEPARTMENT, SECRETARIAT BUILDINGS, VELAGAPUDI, GUNTUR DISTRICT, 522237. 3. THE KADAPA MUNICIPAL CORPORATION, REP BY ITS.. COMMISSIONER, KADAPA, Y.S.R DISTRICT, 516002. 4. THE EXECUTIVE ENGINEER, KADAPA MUNICIPAL CORPORATION, KADAPA, Y.S.R DISTRICT, 516002. 5. THE CHIEF PLANNING OFFICER, PLANNING DEPARTMENT, KADAPA YSR KADAPA DISTRICT, 516001. ...RESPONDENT(S): Counsel for the Petitioner: 2 1. PAPUDIPPU SASHIDAR REDDY Counsel for the Respondent(S): 1. POTHAM VENGALA REDDY SC FOR M.CORPORATION IN RAYALASEEMA REGION 2. GP MUNCIPAL ADMN AND URBAN DEV AP 3. GP FOR FINANCE PLANNING The Court made the following: ORAL ORDER: Heard Sri Shaik Sulthan, learned Counsel appearing for the Writ Petitioner and Sri P. Vengal Reddy, learned Standing Counsel for the Municipal Corporation. 2. Sri P. Vengal Reddy, learned Standing Counsel for the Municipal Corporation has submitted the Written Instructions furnished by the Commissioner (FAC), Kadapa Municipal Corporation, dated 20.04.2026. Copy of it is supplied to the Counsel for the Writ Petitioner and the same is taken on record. 3. Sri P. Vengal Reddy, learned Standing Counsel for the Municipal Corporation, would submit that there is no dispute with regard to the claim of the Writ Petitioner and that the amount could not be uploaded on the NIDHI Portal due to the closure of the Financial Year 2025 - 2026. 4. Since the amount claimed by the Writ Petitioner is admitted and the same could not be uploaded due to the closure of the Financial Year 2025 - 2026, this Court deems it appropriate to allow this Writ Petition with a direction to all the Respondents, particularly Respondent Nos.2 to 4, to complete the entire Administrative process, both inter-departmental and intra-departmental, by way of mutual co-operation and coordination, within a period of sixteen (16) weeks from today, and to transfer the due amount to the bank account of the Writ Petitioner within four (04) weeks thereafter. 3 5. 3 5. The Writ Petitioner is directed to submit the bank account details to the Competent Authority within four (04) weeks from today for effective compliance. 6. With these observations and directions, the Writ Petition is allowed. No order as to costs. 7. Interlocutory Applications, if any, stand closed in terms of this order. _________________________________ GANNAMANENI RAMAKRISHNA PRASAD, J Dt: 20.04.2026 DSV 4 120 HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE GANNAMANENI RAMAKRISHNA PRASAD WRIT PETITION NO: 6183/2026 20.04.2026 DSV 5 HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATHI MAIN CASE No. WRIT PETITION NO: 6183/2026 PROCEEDING SHEET Sl. No DATE ORDER Office Note 20.04.2026 GRKP, J Writ Petition is allowed. (vide separate order) ___________ GRKP, J DSV 6