Gujjala Obula Reddy, vs The State of Andhra Pradesh, Advocate - GP FOR ENDOWMENTS, ,K ANANDA RAO — WP/16551/2016

Disposed: Contested--DISMISSED AS INFRUCTUOUS on 18th June 2026.

Case disposed Next hearing 18-Jul-2016

CNR: APHC010148462016

Filing Number

WP/87211/2016

Filing Date

19-May-2016

Registration No

WP/16551/2016

Registration Date

19-May-2016

Judge

Tarlada Rajasekhar Rao

Coram

Tarlada Rajasekhar Rao

Bench Type

Single Bench

Category

WP ( 28 )

Sub-Category

LEASE OF PROPERTY ( 21 )

Judicial Branch

WRIT Section

Decision Date

18-Jun-2026

Nature of Disposal

Contested--DISMISSED AS INFRUCTUOUS

Last updated 19-Jun-2026

Petitioner(s)

  1. 1.Gujjala Obula Reddy,

    Adv. S V MUNI REDDY

  2. 2.Lakku Rosi Reddy,

  3. 3.Gujjala Anji Reddy,

Respondent(s)

  1. 1.The State of Andhra Pradesh, Advocate - GP FOR ENDOWMENTS, ,K ANANDA RAO

  2. 2.The Commissioner of Endowments,

  3. 3.Sri Madhava Swamy Devasthanam

Case History

  1. Case disposedDisposed

  2. 18-Jun-2026

    Tarlada Rajasekhar RaoView PDF

    The High Court of Andhra Pradesh dismissed Writ Petition No. 16551/2016 as infructuous on June 18, 2026. The petitioners—three agriculturists—had sought a mandamus declaring the Sri Madhava Swamy Devasthanam's interference with their peaceful possession of 32-04 cents of land illegal and requesting six months to harvest eucalyptus trees. However, the petitioners' counsel represented that the cause of action no longer survived and the matter had become infructuous, which the court accepted, dismissing the petition without costs. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

  3. 18-Jul-2016

    Admission (Endowments)

    T.sunil Chowdary

  4. 19-May-2016

    Case filed

    Registration No. WP/16551/2016

casestatus.in Summary

The High Court of Andhra Pradesh dismissed Writ Petition No. 16551/2016 as infructuous on June 18, 2026. The petitioners—three agriculturists—had sought a mandamus declaring the Sri Madhava Swamy Devasthanam's interference with their peaceful possession of 32-04 cents of land illegal and requesting six months to harvest eucalyptus trees. However, the petitioners' counsel represented that the cause of action no longer survived and the matter had become infructuous, which the court accepted, dismissing the petition without costs. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

Explore other courts

District Courts Supreme Court
Search Another Case