Research › Search › Judgment

High Court of Andhra Pradesh · body

2025 DAILYLAW 19204 (AP)

J. Srinivas S/o. J. Sitarama Rao, v. The State of Andhra Pradesh, Rep. by its Principal Secretary

WP/18931/2015 · 2025-01-03

V Sujatha

body2025

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

1 APHC010266692015 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) [3333] FRIDAY, THE THIRD DAY OF JANUARY TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SMT JUSTICE V.SUJATHA WRIT PETITION NO: 18931/2015 Between: J.Srinivas S/o. J. Sitarama Rao, and another ...PETITIONER(S) AND The State of Andhra Pradesh Rep. by its Principal Secretary and others ...RESPONDENT(S) Counsel for the Petitioner(S): 1. MOHD ISLAMUDDIN ANSARI Counsel for the Respondent(S): 1. Sireesha Rani Vallabhaneni,Standing Counsel For Municipalities 2. GP-MUNCIPAL ADMN AND URBAN DEV(AP) The Court made the following: 2 ORDER: This Writ Petition is filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India seeking the following relief:- “….to issue an appropriate Writ or order or direction particularly one in the nature of Writ of Mandamus declaring the action of the 3rd respondent in issuing impugned endorsement dated 26.03.2015 so far as Condition No.8 and 9 are concerned and issuing the endorsement dated 28.05.2015 without considering the relevant law and also the representation dated 25.04.2015 submitted by the 4th respondent and not granting permission for non compliance of the said conditions, as arbitrary, illegal and in violation of well settled principles of natural justice and contrary to the provisions of the Andhra Pradesh Municipalities Act 1965….” 2. Heard learned counsel for the petitioners and learned counsel appearing for the respondents. 3. When the matter came up for admission on 17.08.2015, this Court passed the following interim order: “….there shall be interim direction directing the 3rd respondent to consider the application for grant of permission without insisting compliance of conditions 8 and 9 of the impugned endorsement dated 26.03.2015 of the 3rd respondent.” 4. Today, when the matter came up for hearing, learned Standing Counsel for respondent No.3 furnished a copy of instructions of the Municipal Commissioner, Chilakaluripet, dated 02.01.2025, wherein it is stated that in pursuance of the interim order granted by this Court on 17.08.2015, the Municipal authorities issued a building permit order dated 10.11.2015 to the 3 petitioner for construction of new petroleum outlet at Sy.No.753-E of Pasumarru Revenue Village, Chilakaluripet Municipality. 5. Recording the same, this Court feels that no further cause survives in this writ petition. 6. Accordingly, the Writ Petition is closed. There shall be no order as to costs. As a sequel, Interlocutory Applications pending, if any, in this Writ Petition, shall stand closed. __________________ JUSTICE V.SUJATHA Date: 03.01.2025 KGR