Research › Search › Judgment

High Court of Andhra Pradesh · body

2025 DAILYLAW 13988 (AP)

SRI VINAYAKA STONE CRUSHING INDUSTRY v. THE STATE OF AP

WP/10792/2020 · 2025-08-04

Venkata Jyothirmai Pratapa

body2025

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

1 APHC010171022020 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) [3396] TUESDAY, THE FIFTH DAY OF AUGUST TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE PRESENT THE HONOURABLE DR JUSTICE VENKATA JYOTHIRMAI PRATAPA WRIT PETITION NO: 10792/2020 Between: 1. SRI VINAYAKA STONE CRUSHING INDUSTRY, REP. BY ITS PARTNER A. VIKRAM REDDY, FATHER NAME. A. RAM REDDY, AGE. 37, AT SY.NO. 262, MADHAPUR VILLAGE, TURKAPALLY MANDAL, YADADRI BHONGIR DISTRICT, TELANGANA ...PETITIONER AND 1. THE STATE OF AP, REP. BY ITS PRINCIPAL SECRETARY, HOME DEPARTMENT SECRETARIAT, VELAGAPUDI, GUNTUR DISTRICT 2. THE STATION HOUSE OFFICER, CIRCLE INSPECTOR OF POLICE, BANGANPALLI POLICE STATION, KURNOOL DISTRICT ...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 to issue an appropriate writ, order or direction more particularly one in the nature Writ of Mandamus, declaring the illegal action of the 2nd respondent in preventing the petitioner from lifting the plant and machinery purchased from the authorized persons vide memorandum of sale of plant and machinery dated 12.10.2019 though there is no restraint order from competent civil court or any other legal forum only by succumbing to political pressures without any jurisdiction as illegal, arbitrary violative of Article 19(1)(g), 21, 300- A of The Constitution of India and pass IA NO: 1 OF 2020 2 Petition under Section 151 CPC praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed in support of the petition, the High Court may be pleased IA NO: 2 OF 2020 Petition under Section 151 CPC praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed in support of the petition, the High Court may be pleased to implead the petitioner as Respondent No.3 as she is proper and necessary party and to resolve the real questions in controversy in the writ petition and to pass Counsel for the Petitioner: 1. K RATHANGA PANI REDDY Counsel for the Respondent(S): 1. GP FOR HOME 3 THE HONOURABLE DR JUSTICE VENKATA JYOTHIRMAI PRATAPA WRIT PETITION NO: 10792/2020 ORDER: This Writ Petition is filed under Article 226 of Constitution of India with the following prayer for: “…pleased to issue an appropriate writ, order or direction more particularly one in the nature Writ of Mandamus, declaring the illegal action of the 2nd respondent in preventing the petitioner from lifting the plant and machinery purchased from the authorized persons vide memorandum of sale of plant and machinery dated 12.10.2019 though there is no restraint order from competent civil court or any other legal forum only by succumbing to political pressures without any jurisdiction as illegal, arbitrary violative of Article 19(1)(g), 21, 300- A of The Constitution of India and pass…” 2. When the matter was taken up for hearing, learned counsel for the petitioner would submit that the petition may be disposed of, since the relief has become infructuous. 3. Sri V. Farooq, learned Assistant Government Pleader for Home is in attendance. 4. Recording the above said submission, the Writ Petition is dismissed, since the relief has become infructuous. No order as to costs. As a sequel thereto, miscellaneous petitions pending, if any, shall stand closed. _________________________________________ Dr. JUSTICE VENKATA JYOTHIRMAI PRATAPA Date: 05.08.2025 UPS 4 HON’BLE DR. JUSTICE VENKATA JYOTHIRMAI PRATAPA W.P.No.10792 of 2020 Dated.05.08.2025 UPS 65