APHC010304652019 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) [3459] THURSDAY, THE TWENTY EIGHTH DAY OF AUGUST TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SMT JUSTICE SUMATHI JAGADAM WRIT PETITION NO: 14412/2019 Between: 1. MAMIDI PRASANTHI, W/O B.SESHU KUMAR, AGE 46 YEARS, OCC BUSIENSS, PROPRIETOR, ROHINI TEJA INDANE GAS DISTRIBUTORS, R/O 82-17-23-1, LAKSHMI DEVI TEMPLE STREET, 1ST LANE, AVA ROAD, RAJAMUNDRY. ...PETITIONER AND 1. UNION OF INDIA, REP. BY SECRETARY, MINISTRY OF PETROLEUM AND NATURAL GAS GOVT. OF INDIA, NEW DELHI. 2. THE EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR, INDIAN OIL CORPORATION LTD. TELANGANA AND A.P. STATE OFFICE, 3-6-43 TO 438, II AND IIIRD FLOOR NASPUR HOUSE, HYDERABAD-500C29. 3. GENERAL MANAGER LPGS INDIAN OIL CORPORATION, TELANGANA AND A.P. STATE OFFICE, 3-6-43 TO 438, II AND IIIRD FLOOR NASPUR HOUSE, HIMAYATNAGAR, HYDERABAD-500029 4. DEPUTY GENERAL MANAGER LPGS IOCL, VISHAKHA INDANE AREA OFFICE, 8TH FLOOR, LIC BUILDING, JEEVAN PRAKASH, JEEVITHA BHEEMA MARAG, VISHAKHAPATNAM-530004. 5. DEPUTY GENERAL MANAGER PLANT INDANE BOTTLING PLANT, (LPG) PARAWADA, THANAM VILLAGE, PARAWADA MANDAL, VISHAKHAPATNAM DISTRICT, A.P ...RESPONDENT(S): 2 JS,J W.P.No.14412/2019 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 declare the action of the respondents in imposing penalities on the petitioner on the pretext that the rating of her is found to be below average basing on the information received electronically after 10 days and not updating the software on par with the other OMCs which are able to meet TDT norms, the Targeted Delivery Time within 4 days and that too even without following the statutory stipulations of Targeted Delivery Norms or even without considering my mail asking time for giving reply as she was not well as being illegal, arbitrary and is in violation of principles of natural justice and fair play apart from being in violation of Articles 19(10)(g), 21 and 300-A of the Constitution of India, and consequently set aside the impugned proceedings No. REF/NO VAO/TDT/Q2/248,dated 22-08-2019 of the 4th respondent, and pas IA NO: 1 OF 2019 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 suspend the operation of the impugned alleged SpE Order proceedings REF/NO VAO/TDT/Q2/248„ Dtd 22-08-19 of the 4thldnet, pending disposal of the above writ petition and pass Counsel for the Petitioner: 1. V NITESH Counsel for the Respondent(S): 1. M INDRANI 2. S.V.S.S.SIVA RAM 3. DOMINIC FERNANDES 3 JS,J W.P.No.14412/2019 The Court made the following ORDER: Sri Ch. Karthik, learned counsel, representing Sri V. Nitesh, learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the cause in the writ petition does not survive for adjudication. Recording the above submission, the Writ Petition is dismissed as infructuous. No order as to costs. As a sequel, miscellaneous applications pending, if any, shall stand closed. __________________________________ JUSTICE SUMATHI JAGADAM Dated: 28.08.2025 KAS