IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH :: AMARAVAjpg:?^ THURSDAY, THE TWENTIETH DAY OF FEBRUARY TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE PRESENT HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE DHIRAJ SINGH THAKUR, CHIEF JUSTICE c 31 AND HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE R RAGHUNANDAN RAO. WRIT APPEAL NO: 844 OF 2024 ^ Writ Appeal under clause 15 of the Letters Patent against the order dated 30.08.2024 in W.P.No.16049 of 2024 on the file of the High Court. ^ Between; Mythri CT Scan and Diagnostics, Reptd by it's Managing Partner Dr.Kopparthi Krishna Srinivas, Occ; Medical Practitioner, Aged about 50 D.No.5-6-6 (Revised .5-6-8), Court street, Narasapuram, West Godavari District, A.P M/s. Years ...APPELLANT/(PETITIONER) AND 1. The State of Andhra Pradesh, Rep. by its Principal Secretary, Health Medical and Family Welfare Department, Secretariat Buildings, Velagapudi, Guntur District, A.P. 2. The Chairman DLMMAA/District Collector, Bhimavaram, West Godavari District, A.P. 3. The District Medical and Health officer. West Godavari District, Bhimavaram, West Godavari District, A.P. 4. The Deputy District Medical and Health officer and Member Secretary SDLMMAA, Narasapuram Division, West Godavari District, A.P ...RESPONDENTS lA NO: 1 OF 2024 .. under Section 151 CPC praying that in the circumstances Petition stated in the affidavit filed in support of the petition, the High Court may be % impugned final order dt.30.08.2024 in V -^aJeasdd to suspend the V^P.No.16049 of 2024 pending disposal of above Writ Appeal.^ \ ■ Counsel for the Appellant: SRI D. V. V. S. S. N H BHUJANGA RAO _ Counsel for the Respondent Nos.1 to 4: THE ADDL. ADVOCATE GENERAL The Court made the following: JUDGMENT Bench Sr.No:-51 [3446] IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI APHC010413342024 WRIT APPEAL NO; 844 of 2024 ...Appellant Mythri CT Scan and Diagnostics Vs. ...Respondents The State of AP and others ********** Mr. D. V. V. S. S. N. H. Bhujanga Rao Advocate for Appellant; Addl. Advocate General Advocate for Respondents: CORAM '.THE CHIEF JUSTICE DHIRAJ SINGH THAKUR SRI JUSTICE R. RAGHUNANDAN RAO ; 20**’ February, 2025. DATE P C ; The present writ appeal under Clause 15 of the Letters Patent has been preferred against judgment and order dated 13.08.2024, passed in W.P.No.16049 of 2024. Briefly stated the material facts are as under; 2. The appellant, who was the petitioner before the learned single Judge applied for renewal of registration of its diagnostic centre being run in the of M/s.Mythri CT Scan and Diagnostics in terms of the provisions of the Andhra Pradesh Allopathic Private Medical Care Establishments (Registration I and Regulation) Act, 2002 (for short, “APMCE Act”). The said application name HCJ & RRR, J WA 844 2024 seeking renewal of registration, however, was rejected by the concerned authorities on the ground that proper details had not been furnished. As per the application form which was submitted by the petitioner, the petitioner was required to furnish ‘documentary proof of accommodation ownership’. 3. The petitioner, it is stated, had not furnished proof of either ownership or any document including the rent deed/lease deed in respect of the property in question. According to the stand of the official respondents before the learned single Judge, since the petitioner had failed to furnish such a document along with application form, the application for renewal of registration was rightly rejected. 4. It appears from a reading of one of the documents on record, which is in the shape of a suit for eviction, filed by the owner of the property, from where the diagnostic centre was being operated, that there was a lease created in favour of the petitioner for a period of six years, which commenced from 05.12.2013 to 31.12.2019, it was also on account of refusal of the petitioner to vacate the said property, that the suit came to be filed against the petitioner. The learned single Judge observed that the rent/lease deed which was being relied upon by the petitioner was in fact an affidavit on e-stamp paper which was named as a lease deed, which could not be treated as either a rent deed or a lease deed and further that no documentary evidence was produced before the concerned registering authority, in the absence whereof the rejection of the application was justified 5. 3 HCJ & RRR, J WA 844 2024 It is in the aforementioned backdrop that the learned single Judge disposed of the writ petition with a direction to the petitioner to submit an application with a proper rent/lease deed duly executed in between the petitioner and the owner of the property, as per the APMCE Act, on such a submission, the respondents were directed to consider the application and pass appropriate orders, without any further delay. 6. From the record, it can be seen that the petitioner had filed O.S.No.133 of 2020, wherein the stand taken was that the landlord had created an oral lease in favor of the petitioner for a period of 20 years, on a monthly rental 7. basis. Be that as it may, in the absence of proof of document as was required in terms of the application form, the case of the petitioner for renewal of registration was rightly rejected. 8. Learned counsel for the appellant would further submit that there was no possibility to get executed a rent/lease deed from the landlord, in view of the pendency of O.S.No.133 of 2020 and O.S.No.212 of 2020, which are currently pending before the civil Courts. 9. However, mere pendency of civil cases before the civil Courts would not in any manner invalidate the requirement of production of the requisite documents which are required to be considered for renewal of the registration. 10. earlier granted. 4 HCJ & RRR, J WA 844 2024 Be that as it may, we do not find any merit in the present writ appeal 11. which is accordingly dismissed. No order as to costs. Pending miscellaneous applications, if any, in this appeal shall stand closed. / Sd/- M.RAMESH BABU DEPUTY REGISTRAR //TRUE COPY// §4- ( .c;SECTION OFFICER To, 1. One CC to Sri D. V. V. S. S. N. H. Bhujanga Rao, Advocate [OPUC] 2. Two CC’s to the Advocate General, High Court OrA.P. at^ ^ Amaravati[OPUC] 3. Three CD Copies. ssb HIGH COURT DATED:20/02/2025 JUDGMENT c 13 MAR 2025 n ^ . Current Section WA.No.844 of 2024 IBO DISMISSING THE W.A. WITHOUT COSTS