K. Ramana Reddy, vs The State of A.P., Advocate - GP MUNCIPAL ADMN AND URBAN DEV AP, ,K JANARDHANA RAO,B D MAHESWARA REDDY — WP/34558/2014

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

Case disposed Next hearing 17-Nov-2014

CNR: APHC010760952014

Filing Number

WP/186917/2014

Filing Date

13-Nov-2014

Registration No

WP/34558/2014

Registration Date

13-Nov-2014

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.K. Ramana Reddy,

    Adv. MAHADEVA KANTHRIGALA

Respondent(s)

  1. 1.The State of A.P., Advocate - GP MUNCIPAL ADMN AND URBAN DEV AP, ,K JANARDHANA RAO,B D MAHESWARA REDDY

  2. 2.Tirupati Municipal Corporation,

Case History

  1. Case disposedDisposed

  2. 16-Jun-2026

    Harinath.nView PDF

    Case Summary: WP/34558/2014 The Andhra Pradesh High Court dismissed K. Ramana Reddy's petition challenging demolition notices issued by the Tirupati Municipal Corporation regarding structures at Kothapalli Residential Area. The court closed the writ petition because the petitioner failed to appear for hearing and no interim relief was granted, allowing the municipal authorities to proceed with further action based on the notices. The court left open the option for the petitioner to file a fresh petition if circumstances demand. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

  3. 17-Nov-2014

    Admission (Municipal Admn.)

    M.s.ramachandra Rao

  4. 13-Nov-2014

    Case filed

    Registration No. WP/34558/2014

casestatus.in Summary

Case Summary: WP/34558/2014 The Andhra Pradesh High Court dismissed K. Ramana Reddy's petition challenging demolition notices issued by the Tirupati Municipal Corporation regarding structures at Kothapalli Residential Area. The court closed the writ petition because the petitioner failed to appear for hearing and no interim relief was granted, allowing the municipal authorities to proceed with further action based on the notices. The court left open the option for the petitioner to file a fresh petition if circumstances demand. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

Explore other courts

District Courts Supreme Court
Search Another Case