Reasu Mamatha vs The State of Telangana Advocate - GP FOR AGRICULTURE — WP/6602/2026

Case under Constitution of India Section 226. Disposed: Contested--DISPOSED OF NO COSTS on 03rd March 2026.

Case disposed

CNR: HBHC010131602026

Filing Number

WP/9644/2026

Filing Date

28-Feb-2026

Registration No

WP/6602/2026

Registration Date

02-Mar-2026

Judge

Surepalli Nanda

Coram

Surepalli Nanda

Bench Type

Single Bench

Category

WP ( 28 )

Sub-Category

COMM.OF AGRICULTURE ( 4 )

Judicial Branch

WRIT Section

Decision Date

03-Mar-2026

Nature of Disposal

Contested--DISPOSED OF NO COSTS

Last updated 20-May-2026

Acts & Sections

Constitution of India Section 226

Petitioner(s)

  1. 1.Reasu Mamatha

    Adv. RAPOLU BHASKAR

Respondent(s)

  1. 1.The State of Telangana Advocate - GP FOR AGRICULTURE

  2. 2.The Commissioner

  3. 3.The District Collector

  4. 4.The District Agriculture Officer

  5. 5.The Agriculture Officer

  6. 6.The Thasildar

Case History

  1. Case disposedDisposed

  2. 13-Apr-2026

    Surepalli NandaView PDF

    Summary The Telangana High Court allowed the writ petition filed by Resu Mamatha, directing Respondent Nos.5 and 6 (Agriculture Officer and Thasildar) to consider her representation dated 30.11.2025 and restore the Rythu Bharosa (Rythu Bandhu) and Rythu Bheema Schemes on her agricultural land within three weeks. The court found that the cancellation of these schemes without prior notice and due process of law violated principles of natural justice, and the government officials did not dispute the petitioner's submissions. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

  3. 03-Mar-2026

    Admission (Food)

    Surepalli Nanda

  4. 28-Feb-2026

    Case filed

    Registration No. WP/6602/2026

casestatus.in Summary

Summary The Telangana High Court allowed the writ petition filed by Resu Mamatha, directing Respondent Nos.5 and 6 (Agriculture Officer and Thasildar) to consider her representation dated 30.11.2025 and restore the Rythu Bharosa (Rythu Bandhu) and Rythu Bheema Schemes on her agricultural land within three weeks. The court found that the cancellation of these schemes without prior notice and due process of law violated principles of natural justice, and the government officials did not dispute the petitioner's submissions. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

Explore other courts

District Courts Supreme Court
Search Another Case