Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (AP) 259 – 2026 LiveLaw (AP) 267

Nominal Index

W.P. (SR) No. 45133 of 2026, 2026 LiveLaw (AP) 259

Chodisetty Nirmalatha v. State of Andhra Pradesh and Others; Gade Hanumantha Rao Naidu and Others v. State of Andhra Pradesh and Others, 2026 LiveLaw (AP) 260

Bandaru Anantha Lakshmi & Others v. Nelaprolu Venkat Rao (Deceased) by LRs & Others, 2026 LiveLaw (AP) 261

Majji Guru Naidu v. State of Andhra Pradesh & Ors, 2026 LiveLaw (AP) 262

C.V. Pavan Kumar v. Education (E.E.I) Department and Others, 2026 LiveLaw (AP) 263

Suvvala Sateesh and Others v. State of Andhra Pradesh and Others, 2026 LiveLaw (AP) 264

Karimajji Ramakrishna and Others v. State of Andhra Pradesh and Others, 2026 LiveLaw (AP) 265

Udatha Narayana v. The Official Receiver, Nellore and Others, 2026 LiveLaw (AP) 266

Govardhana Girishwara Devasthanam Trust & Anr. v. Union of India & Others, 2026 LiveLaw (AP) 267

Judgement/ Orders

Operation Of Model Code Of Conduct For Local Body Elections Can't Impede Implementation Of Promotion: AP High Court

Case No.: W.P. (SR) No. 45133 of 2026

Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (AP) 259

The Andhra Pradesh High Court has held that orders of constitutional courts bind the executive even during the Model Code of Conduct (MCC) for elections.

It observed that the Model Code of Conduct cannot prevent the implementation of a promotion granted pursuant to a direction issued by the High Court.

Even Small-Scale Land Acquisition Must Follow Due Procedure, Right To Property Can't Be Deprived Except As Per Law: AP High Court

Case Title :  Chodisetty Nirmalatha v. State of Andhra Pradesh and Others; Gade Hanumantha Rao Naidu and Others v. State of Andhra Pradesh and Others

Case Number :  Writ Appeal Nos. 849 and 850 of 2026

Citation :  2026 LiveLaw (AP) 260

The Andhra Pradesh High Court has held that the right to property under Article 300-A of the Constitution cannot be disregarded merely because a small portion of land is being acquired.

It observed that deprivation of property must not only be authorised by law but must also follow the procedure established by law, even where the acquisition serves a larger public interest.

The Court accordingly directed the expeditious consideration of interim relief applications filed by landowners challenging the acquisition of land for the E-3 Seed Access Road project in the Andhra Pradesh Capital Region under the Right to Fair Compensation and Transparency in Land Acquisition, Rehabilitation and Resettlement Act, 2013.

Judgments Debtors Who Evade Notice, Fail To Show Reasons For Delay In Challenging Orders Can't Prolong Execution Proceedings: AP High Court

Case Title :  Bandaru Anantha Lakshmi & Others v. Nelaprolu Venkat Rao (Deceased) by LRs & Others

Case Number :  Civil Revision Petition Nos. 353, 297, 355, 354 and 540 of 2026

Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (AP) 261

The Andhra Pradesh High Court has held that judgment debtors who intentionally evade court notices and fail to show sufficient cause for condoning delays in seeking to set aside ex parte orders cannot be permitted to prolong execution proceedings.

The Court observed that the judgment debtors' applications seeking condonation of delay in challenging the ex parte orders appeared to have been filed only to further drag on the execution proceedings, which had remained pending for 24 years.

AP High Court Upholds Police Officer's Pay Reduction For Concealing Misfire, Says Negligence In Duty Can't Be Condoned

Case Title :  Majji Guru Naidu v. State of Andhra Pradesh & Ors

Case Number :  W.P. No. 2142 of 2023

Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (AP) 262

The Andhra Pradesh High Court has upheld the punishment imposed on an Andhra Pradesh Special Police (APSP) Reserve Inspector for failing to report an accidental firing incident involving a constable.

The punishment involved reduction of pay by one stage for one year, with cumulative effect on future increments and pension.

AP High Court Upholds 3-Year Deadline For Date Of Birth Correction In School Certificates, Cites Risk Of Age Manipulation For Jobs

Case Title :  C.V. Pavan Kumar v. Education (E.E.I) Department and Others

Case Number :  W.P. No. 27476 of 2003

Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (AP) 263

The Andhra Pradesh High Court has upheld the three-year limitation prescribed under a 1992 state government order for entertaining applications seeking correction or alteration of date of birth in Secondary School Leaving Certificate.

The Court held that the limitation has a rational nexus with the objective sought to be achieved and that a change in date of birth cannot be claimed as a matter of right.

The Bench rejected the contention that the petitioner had nothing to gain from the alteration as he was still a student, observing that permitting such changes could enable candidates to alter dates of birth recorded at elementary school admission to gain an advantage in future employment.

Repeated Extensions Do Not Give Temporary Employees Right To Continue In Service: AP High Court

Case Title :  Suvvala Sateesh and Others v. State of Andhra Pradesh and Others

Case Number :  W.P. No. 27507 of 2024

Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (AP) 264

The Andhra Pradesh High Court has held that temporary employees cannot claim continuation in service as a matter of right after expiry of their fixed tenure, even if their engagements have been extended repeatedly.

The Court made the observation while dismissing a plea by 12 temporary employees of Sri Venkateswara University, Tirupati, challenging the discontinuation of their services without prior notice or formal termination orders.

At the outset, the Court noted that the petitioners had failed to establish any legal right warranting interference under Article 226 of the Constitution, which empowers High Courts to issue writs for the enforcement of legal rights.

Villagers' Concerns Over Groundwater Depletion Not Enough To Halt Beverage Factory With Statutory Approvals: AP High Court

Case Title :  Karimajji Ramakrishna and Others v. State of Andhra Pradesh and Others

Case Number :  W.P. No. 4618 of 2026

Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (AP) 265

The Andhra Pradesh High Court has dismissed a petition challenging a beverages manufacturing unit in Nagarapalem village, Srikakulam district. It held that unsupported fears of environmental damage and groundwater depletion cannot justify halting an industrial project that has obtained statutory approvals.

The Court noted that the petitioners had failed to produce authenticated official records establishing that the disputed land formed part of a public water body or that the company had encroached upon it.

Explaining the limits of judicial review, the Court noted that Article 226 does not ordinarily permit courts to substitute their assessment for the technical decisions of expert statutory authorities.

Application Under Provincial Insolvency Act Cannot Be Dismissed For Lack Of Verification In Affidavit: Andhra Pradesh High Court

Case Title :  Udatha Narayana v. The Official Receiver, Nellore and Others

Case Number :  Civil Revision Petition No. 2503 of 2026

Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (AP) 266

The Andhra Pradesh High Court has recently held that the mere non-mention of solemn verification in an affidavit, despite the presence of solemn affirmation, ipso facto does not warrant rejection of an application as such a defect is curable.

In view of this, the court set aside an order of the insolvency court dismissing an application seeking to set aside an allegedly fraudulent property transaction on the ground that the supporting affidavit was defective.

NHAI Has Expertise In Development & Maintenance Of Highways, Courts Can't Interfere In Project Unless Mala Fide Shown: AP High Court

Case Title :  Govardhana Girishwara Devasthanam Trust & Anr. v. Union of India & Others

Case Number :  W.P. (PIL) No. 235 of 2026

Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (AP) 267

The Andhra Pradesh High Court has dismissed a PIL seeking an alternative location for the proposed Chittoor-Thatchur Highway interchange, holding that the petitioners failed to establish any ground to doubt the alignment approved by the National Highways Authority of India (NHAI).

The Court declined to direct a fresh feasibility assessment, observing that highway alignment decisions involve technical expertise and warrant judicial interference only in exceptional cases involving illegality or mala fides.