Research › Search › Judgment

High Court of Andhra Pradesh · body

2025 DAILYLAW 37917 (AP)

M/s Gayatri Enterprises v. The State of Andhra Pradesh

WP/30040/2011 · 2025-03-06

Subba Reddy Satti

body2025

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

APHC010675042011 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) [3331] THURSDAY, THE SIXTH DAY OF MARCH TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE SUBBA REDDY SATTI WRIT PETITION NO: 30040/2011 Between: 1. M/S GAYATRI ENTERPRISES, A PARTNERSHIP FIRM, REP BY ITS MANAGING PARTNER, SRI R.V.L.N.JAGAPATHI RAJU, S/O LATE SRI S.R.V.CH.S.JAGAPATHI RAJU, AGE:71 YRS, OCC: BUSINESS, R/O D.NO.8-22-32 (4F/A-I) ...PETITIONER AND 1. THE STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH, REP BY ITS SECRETARY, TRANSPORT (PORTS - I) DEPARTMENT, SECRETARIAT BUILDINGS, HYDERABAD. 2. THE DIRECTOR OF PORTS, KAKINADA. 3. GOVERNMENT OF ANDHRA PRADESH, REP BY ITS SECRETARY, INFRASTRUCTURE & INVESTMENT (PORTS I) DEPARTMENT, SECRETARIAT BUILDINGS, HYDERABAD. 4. THE DISTRICT COLLECTOR, KAKINADA, EAST GODAVARI 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 toto issue any appropriate Writ, Order or direction, preferably a Writ in the nature of Mandamus, declaring the G.O.Ms.No.2, Infrastructure & Investment (Ports I ) Dept., dated 09.01.2009 as well as the consequential termination notice dated 06.07.2011 as being arbitrary and violative of Article 14 of the Constitution of India and consequently, set aside the same and to pass 2 IA NO: 1 OF 2011(WPMP 37229 OF 2011 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 direct the respondents not to dispossess the petitioner in respect of the land admeasuring five acres bearing plot No.20, situated in Sy.No.376/p, 1980/p & 1981/p of Kakinada pending disposal of the above Writ Petition; and to pass IA NO: 1 OF 2012(WVMP 232 OF 2012 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 vacate the Interim Orders, dated 11.11.2011 passed in WPMP No. 37229 of 2011 in WP No. 30040 of 2011 in the interest of justice and pass Counsel for the Petitioner: 1. P VENUGOPAL Counsel for the Respondent(S): 1. GP FOR ROADS BUILDINGS 2. GP FOR REVENUE 3. GP FOR TRANSPORT The Court made the following: ::ORDER:: Sri P.Venugopal, learned counsel for the petitioner seeks permission to withdraw the present writ petition. 2. Permission is accorded. 3. Accordingly, this writ petition is dismissed as withdrawn. No order as to costs. Miscellaneous petitions, if any pending, in this case, shall stand closed. ___________________________ JUSTICE SUBBA REDDY SATTI Dated: 06.03.2025 SNI 3 163 HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE SUBBA REDDY SATTI WRIT PETITION No.30040 OF 2011 Dated: 06.03.2025 SNI