Chirumella Basaweswara Rao, vs State of Andhra Pradesh, Advocate - GP MUNCIPAL ADMN AND URBAN DEV AP, ,VENKATESWARLU NIMMAGADDA — WP/18150/2016

Disposed: Uncontested--CLOSED NO COSTS on 16th June 2026.

Case disposed Next hearing 01-Jun-2017

CNR: APHC010122482016

Filing Number

WP/96632/2016

Filing Date

08-Jun-2016

Registration No

WP/18150/2016

Registration Date

08-Jun-2016

Judge

Harinath.n

Coram

Harinath.n

Bench Type

Single Bench

Category

WP ( 28 )

Sub-Category

MUNICIPALITY AND URBAN DEVP.(MISC.MATTERS) ( 30 )

Judicial Branch

WRIT Section

Decision Date

16-Jun-2026

Nature of Disposal

Uncontested--CLOSED NO COSTS

Last updated 17-Jun-2026

Petitioner(s)

  1. 1.Chirumella Basaweswara Rao,

    Adv. J UGRANARASIMHA

Respondent(s)

  1. 1.State of Andhra Pradesh, Advocate - GP MUNCIPAL ADMN AND URBAN DEV AP, ,VENKATESWARLU NIMMAGADDA

  2. 2.Narasaraopet Municipality,

Case History

  1. Case disposedDisposed

  2. 16-Jun-2026

    Harinath.nView PDF

    Case Summary: WP/18150/2016 The High Court of Andhra Pradesh closed the writ petition filed by Chirumella Basaweswara Rao against Narasaraopet Municipality's alleged encroachment on his property (1345.91 sq. yards) for drainage construction without proper land acquisition proceedings. The court noted that the Municipality had already completed the cement concrete drainage in the petitioner's presence, and due to the petitioner's non-appearance on the final hearing date (27.04.2018), the petition was dismissed with liberty for the petitioner to pursue alternative remedies if needed. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

  3. 30-Apr-2018

    For Orders

    P.keshava Rao

  4. 01-Jun-2017

    First hearing

    Initial hearing scheduled

  5. 08-Jun-2016

    Case filed

    Registration No. WP/18150/2016

casestatus.in Summary

Case Summary: WP/18150/2016 The High Court of Andhra Pradesh closed the writ petition filed by Chirumella Basaweswara Rao against Narasaraopet Municipality's alleged encroachment on his property (1345.91 sq. yards) for drainage construction without proper land acquisition proceedings. The court noted that the Municipality had already completed the cement concrete drainage in the petitioner's presence, and due to the petitioner's non-appearance on the final hearing date (27.04.2018), the petition was dismissed with liberty for the petitioner to pursue alternative remedies if needed. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

Explore other courts

District Courts Supreme Court
Search Another Case