BHAGIRATH DADHICH vs UNION OF INDIA Advocate - M UMA DEVI (CENTRAL GOVT COUNSEL) — WP/9869/2026
Case under Constitution of India Section 226. Next hearing: 14th July 2026.
CNR: APHC010195892026
Filing Number
WP/15753/2026
Filing Date
10-Apr-2026
Registration No
WP/9869/2026
Registration Date
10-Apr-2026
Judge
Ravi Cheemalapati
Coram
Ravi Cheemalapati
Bench Type
Single Bench
Category
WP ( 28 )
Sub-Category
CENTRAL GOVERNMENT MATTERS (MISC.MATTERS) ( 7 )
Judicial Branch
WRIT Section
Last updated 17-Jun-2026
Acts & Sections
Petitioner(s)
-
1.BHAGIRATH DADHICH
Adv. CHILUKURI KARTHIK
Respondent(s)
-
1.UNION OF INDIA Advocate - M UMA DEVI (CENTRAL GOVT COUNSEL)
-
2.Registrar of Firms and Societies,
Adv. M UMA DEVI (CENTRAL GOVT COUNSEL)
-
3.Roller Skating Federation of India,
Adv. CKR ASSOCIATES
-
4.Tulsi Ram Agarwal,
Case History
-
14-Jul-2026
Next hearingPending
-
14-Jul-2026
Admission (Central Govt.)
Ravi Cheemalapati
-
16-Jun-2026
Ravi CheemalapatiView PDF
Case Summary: WP/9869/2026 On 16.06.2026, the High Court of Andhra Pradesh adjourned the case to 14.07.2026. The court permitted petitioner's counsel to serve personal notices on the 2nd respondent (Registrar of Firms and Societies) via registered post with acknowledgement due, accepting that the failure to serve earlier was inadvertent and not willful. Interim orders previously granted were extended for eight weeks. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
-
15-Jun-2026
Admission (Central Govt.)
Battu Devanand
-
07-May-2026
Admission (Central Govt.)
Battu Devanand
-
15-Apr-2026
Battu DevanandView PDF
-
15-Apr-2026
Battu DevanandView PDF
-
15-Apr-2026
Battu DevanandView PDF
-
15-Apr-2026
First hearing
Initial hearing scheduled
-
10-Apr-2026
Case filed
Registration No. WP/9869/2026
Case Summary: WP/9869/2026 On 16.06.2026, the High Court of Andhra Pradesh adjourned the case to 14.07.2026. The court permitted petitioner's counsel to serve personal notices on the 2nd respondent (Registrar of Firms and Societies) via registered post with acknowledgement due, accepting that the failure to serve earlier was inadvertent and not willful. Interim orders previously granted were extended for eight weeks. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Explore other courts