RAPETI RAJYA LAKSHMI vs THE STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH Advocate - GP FOR REVENUE — WP/14350/2026

Case under Constitution of India Section 226. Disposed: Uncontested--DISPOSED OF NO COSTS on 14th May 2026.

Case disposed

CNR: APHC010280212026

Filing Number

WP/22459/2026

Filing Date

12-May-2026

Registration No

WP/14350/2026

Registration Date

12-May-2026

Judge

Y. Lakshmana Rao

Coram

Y. Lakshmana Rao

Bench Type

Single Bench

Category

WP ( 28 )

Sub-Category

REVENUE (MISC.MATTERS) ( 37 )

Judicial Branch

WRIT Section

Decision Date

14-May-2026

Nature of Disposal

Uncontested--DISPOSED OF NO COSTS

Last updated 01-Jun-2026

Acts & Sections

Constitution of India Section 226

Petitioner(s)

  1. 1.RAPETI RAJYA LAKSHMI

    Adv. NALLURI RAMESH BABU

Respondent(s)

  1. 1.THE STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH Advocate - GP FOR REVENUE

  2. 2.The Revenue Divisional Officer,

  3. 3.The Tahsildar,

  4. 4.The Chairman,

  5. 5.The District Collector,

Case History

  1. Case disposedDisposed

  2. 14-May-2026

    Y. Lakshmana RaoView PDF

    Summary of WP/14350/2026 The High Court of Andhra Pradesh disposed of two writ petitions seeking to restrain the State from occupying or destroying coconut plantations on claimed lands. The court directed respondents not to occupy or destroy the plantations without following due process and issuing proper notice, while directing petitioners to file appropriate civil suits for declaration of title and injunction, as the merits of title and possession cannot be adjudicated in writ proceedings. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

  3. 14-May-2026

    Admission (Revenue)

    Y. Lakshmana Rao

  4. 12-May-2026

    Case filed

    Registration No. WP/14350/2026

casestatus.in Summary

Summary of WP/14350/2026 The High Court of Andhra Pradesh disposed of two writ petitions seeking to restrain the State from occupying or destroying coconut plantations on claimed lands. The court directed respondents not to occupy or destroy the plantations without following due process and issuing proper notice, while directing petitioners to file appropriate civil suits for declaration of title and injunction, as the merits of title and possession cannot be adjudicated in writ proceedings. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

Explore other courts

District Courts Supreme Court
Search Another Case