::1:: APHC010315682025 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) [3208] THURSDAY,THE THIRTEENTH DAY OF NOVEMBER TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE D RAMESH WRIT PETITION NO: 16064/2025 Between: 1.K DURGA RAO, . S/O VENKATARAO AGED 59 YEARS OCC. EMPLOYEE R/O MAIN ROAD GARA (V)(M) SRIKAKULAM ...PETITIONER AND 1.THE STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH, REP. BY ITS PRINCIPAL SECRETARY, REVENUE (EXCISE) DEPARTMENT, SECRETARIAT, VELAGAPUDI, AMARAVATHI, GUNTUR DISTRICT. 2.THE DIRECTOR, EXCISE AND PROHIBITION DEPARTMENT MANGALAGIRI, AMARAVATI GUNTUR. 3.THE DISTRICT PROHIBITION AND EXCISE OFFICER, PROHIBITION AND EXCISE DEPARTMENT SRIKAKULAM 4.THE DISTRICT COLLECTOR, SRIKAKULAM, SRIKAKULAM DISTRICT 5.THE STATION HOUSE OFFICER, PROHIBITION AND EXCISE STATION SRIKAKULAM 6.SKML WINES GSI NO SKL/24, REP. BY ITS PROPRIETOR/LICENSEE GARA VILLAGE AND MANDAL, SRIKAKULAM ...RESPONDENT(S): ::2:: This Court made the following ORDER: 1. This Writ Petition is filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India by the Petitioners for the following relief: “to issue an order, writ or direction, more particularly one in the nature of WRIT OF MANDAMUS declaring the action of respondents not taken any action against 6th respondent liquor shop for relocation from residential area even after several representations made by petitioner is illegal arbitrary and violative of Articles 14 and 21 of the Constitution of India and consequently direct the respondents to forthwith close or relocate the 6th respondent liquor shop situated at Gara (V) (M) Srikakulam from the residential locality (ii) Direct the Respondents to conduct a proper enquiry and inspection of the site and take appropriate legal and administrative action against illegal licensing, if any (iii) Direct the 5th respondent to maintain law and order in the locality and prevent nuisance, illegal drinking, and related mis-behaviour by customers of the 6th respondent liquor shop and pass…” 2. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned Government Pleader for the respondents. 3. The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the respondent authorities have not taken any action against the 6th respondent’s liquor shop for relocation from the residential area, despite several representations made by the petitioner to the 4th respondent/District Collector regarding the illegality of establishing the shop in the residential area. ::3:: 4. On the other hand, the learned Government Pleader for the respondents has furnished written instructions stating that the respondents have considered the representation of the petitioner and also conducted an enquiry regarding the allegations made therein. It is further stated that reliance has been placed on the relevant rules, particularly Rule 24, which provides that a license can be issued provided there are no public worship places, educational institutions, or hospitals within a radius of 100 meters. Accordingly, the District Prohibition and Excise Officer, Srikakulam, issued the license to the licensee for the selected premises. 5. In view of the written instructions submitted by the learned Government Pleader for the respondents, and as the respondent authorities have already considered the representation of the petitioner, no further orders are required to be passed in the Writ Petition. Accordingly, the Writ Petition is closed. No costs. As a sequel, interlocutory applications if any pending, shall stand closed. ________________________ JUSTICE D. RAMESH Dt:13.11.2025 klk ::4:: THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE D. RAMESH WRIT PETITION No.16064 of 2025 Dt:13.11.2025 klk 122