HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH
VENKATESWARLU NIMMAGADDA
Y.Sai Bhargavi – Appellant
Versus
State of Andhra Pradesh rep. by its Principal Secretary – Respondent
WP 6128/2017
##PAGE1##
::1:: 2026:APHC:7329
APHC010073222017 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA
PRADESH
[3329]
AT AMARAVATI
(Special Original Jurisdiction)
TUESDAY,THE THIRD DAY OF FEBRUARY
TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY SIX
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE VENKATESWARLU
NIMMAGADDA
WRIT PETITION NO: 6128/2017
Between:
1. Y .SAI BHARGAVI,, W/O Y.PHANINDRA KUMAR, AGED
ABOUT 37 YEARS, SARPANCH, GRAM PANCHAYAT,
YARLAGADDA, R/O YARLAGADDA VILLAGE,
CHALLAPALLI MANDAL, KRISHNA DISTRICT.
2. V EERAMACHANENI RAGHAVENDRA RAO,, S/O
KUTUMBAIAH, AGED 76 YEARS, R/O YARLAGADDA
VILLAGE, CHALLAPALLI MANDAL, KRISHNA DISTRICT.
3. S URYADEVARA RAMAKRISHNA,, S/O SUBBA RAO,
AGED ABOUT 75 YEARS, VEMULAPALLI VILLAGE,
CHALLAPALLI MANDAL, KRISHNA DISTRICT.
...PETITIONER(S)
AND
1. S TATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH REP BY ITS PRINCIPAL
SECRETARY, HEALTH, MEDICAL & FAMILY WELFARE
DEPT., SECRETARIAT BUILDINGS, VELAGAPUDI,
GUNTUR DISTRICT.
2. T HE DIRECTOR OF MEDICAL HEALTH, GOVERNMENT
##PAGE2##::2:: 2026:APHC:7329
OF ANDHRA PRADESH, VIJAYAWADA.
3. T HE COMMISSIONER AYUSH DEPARTMENT,
GOVERNMENT OF ANDHRA PRADESH, VIJAYAWADA.
4. T HE REGIONAL DEPUTY DIRECTOR AYUSH
DEPARTMENT, GOVERNMENT OF ANDHRA PRADESH,
ELURU, WEST GODAVARI DISTRICT.
5. T HE DISTRICT COLLECTOR KRISHNA DISTRICT AT
MACHILIPATNAM,
...RESPONDENT(S):
Petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying
that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed therewith, the
High Court may be pleased toIssue an appropriate writ, order or
direction more particularly one in the nature of writ of mandamus
declaring the action of the 4th respondent in issuing the Memo
No.75/B-2017, dated 20.1.2017 as illegal, arbitrary, without
authority and violation of Article 14 of the Constitution of India and
consequently set-aside the same and pass
Counsel for the Petitioner(S):
1. V HIMABINDU
Counsel for the Respondent(S):
1. GP FOR MEDICAL HEALTH & FW(AP)
2. GP FOR MEDICAL HEALTH FW(AP)
##PAGE3##::3:: 2026:APHC:7329
HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE VENKATESWARLU NIMMAGADDA
W.P.No.6128 of 2017
This Court made the following
ORDER:
Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that the 4th
respondent herein issued impugned memo dated 20.01.2017 to
shift the Government Homoeopathy Dispensary situated at
petitioners’ village i.e., Yarlagadda Village, Krishna District. The
said Homoeopathy Dispensary has been catering the needs of
the villagers and other general public since decades from the
date of its inception in the year 1960. Learned counsel further
submits that the memo issued by the Respondents without
assigning any reasons and without following due process, more
particularly none of the villagers were informed about the said
impugned memo. The 1st petitioner being a villager and
interested person is of the opinion that if the subject Homeopathy
Dispensary is shifted from the petitioners’ village, the village
people would suffer irreparable loss and hardship due to lack of
Homeopathy and general treatment in the village. Therefore, the
##PAGE4##::4:: 2026:APHC:7329
issuance of impugned memo without following due process and
principles of natural justice is contrary to law and liable to be set
aside. Hence the writ petition.
2. On the other hand, learned Government Pleader furnished
proceedings dated 01.03.2024, wherein it is stated that due to
introduction of policy by the Central Government, the existing 126
Ayush Health and Wellness Centres under the Centrally
Sponsored Scheme of National AYUSH Mission were renamed
as “Ayushman Arogya Mandirs” (for short “AAM”) and decided to
continue these 126 AAMs as it is without there being any
changes. Out of these 126 AAMs enlisted along with
proceedings of the Commissioner, Ayush Department, Andhra
Pradesh, Vijayawada dated 01.03.2024, the petitioners’ AAM at
Yarlagadda is enlisted at S.No.57. Therefore, in view of inclusion
of the petitioners’ AAM at Yarlagadda, it would be continued as it
is without any changes irrespective of the impugned memo
issued by the 4th respondent.
3. Heard learned counsel for the petitioners and learned
Government Pleader for Respondents and perused the materi
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.