High CourtsSingle Bench(2026) 10 AP CK 2618

Nandyala Raghava Reddy vs The State Of Andhra Pradesh & Ors.

Andhra Pradesh High Court, Amaravati · Decided on 16 October 2026

HON’BLE JUDGES
Kiranmayee Mandava, J
CASE NUMBER
Writ Petition No: 30758/2026

CourtKutchehry membership

More clarity. Every judgment.

Download court copies, explore connected cases and make more of every research session.

Loading membership options…

CourtKutchehry membership

More clarity. Every judgment.

Download court copies, explore connected cases and make more of every research session.

Loading membership options…

Ask AI about this case

AI Structured Summary

Not yet generated for this judgment

Judgment

6 paragraphs · 332 words

Heard Sri Javvaji Sarath Chandra, learned counsel for the petitioner, Sri N.Ashwani Kumar, learned Standing Counsel for APSEC appearing for respondent Nos.2, 5 to 7 and Sri Gudapati Lakshminarayana, learned Standing Counsel for Municipalities appearing for respondent No.4.

2.

It is contended that the petitioner is aged 78 years. Before shifting to Proddatur Municipality, petitioner was residing in a village within the local limits of a Gram Panchayat. Seeking transposition of his electoral registration from the said village to the present place of residence from Proddatur. The petitioner has made an application in Form 8 on 25.01.2026. The same was subjected to verification by the authorities. It is further contended that the Form 8 filed by the petitioner was accepted on 10.09.2026 and electoral registration stands reflected in 132 Proddatur Assembly Constituency, Part No.105, Sl.No.801 and the current status of the petitioner’s application is reflecting as “E-ROLL UPDATED”.

3.

It is submitted that the petitioner was also issued EPIC card in the said regard. However, seeking consequential incorporation of name in the ward wise electoral roll of Proddatur Municipality petitioner has made a representation dated 15.10.2026. As the petitioner is intending to contest the ensuing elections, approached this Court seeking indulgence and placed reliance on the earlier orders passed by this Court in W.P.No.29455 of 2026 and W.P.No.29431 of 2026. Accordingly, prays for issuance of similar directions to the respondents.

4.

Having regard to the contentions advanced, as the application of the petitioner for transposition has already been processed and verified much before the election notification, and as the petitioner contends that he is proposing to contest the ensuing local body elections, this Court deems it appropriate to dispose of the Writ Petition with a direction to respondent Nos.2 to 5 to pass appropriate orders forthwith from the date of application of the petitioner.

5.

Accordingly, the Writ Petition is disposed of. There shall be no order as to costs.

As a sequel, miscellaneous applications pending, if any, shall also stand closed.