Research › Search › Judgment

High Court of Andhra Pradesh · body

2025 DAILYLAW 58761 (AP)

PULLASI MADHAVI LATHA v. THE STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH

WP/31343/2025 · 2025-11-20

Venkata Jyothirmai Pratapa

body2025

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

APHC010608262025 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) [3396] FRIDAY, THE TWENTY FIRST DAY OF NOVEMBER TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE PRESENT THE HONOURABLE DR JUSTICE VENKATA JYOTHIRMAI PRATAPA WRIT PETITION NO: 31343/2025 Between: 1. PULLASI MADHAVI LATHA, , W/O.LAKSHMANNA, AGED ABOUT 50 YEARS, OCC. FAIR PRICE SHOP DEALER OF THE SHOP NO. 1348025, R/O. H.NO.2-30, CHINNAPODILLA VILLAGE, PEAPALLY MANDAL, NANDYALA DISTRICT. 2. P.GANGADHAR, , S/O. P.SIVA REDDY, AGED ABOUT 36 YEARS, OCC. FAIR PRICE SHOP DEALER OF THE SHOP NO. 1348020, POTHUDODDI VILLAGE, PEAPULLY MANDAL, NANDHYALA DISTRICT. 3. M.SUDHAKAR NAYUDU,, S/O. M.TIRUPALU, AGED ABOUT 50 YEARS, OCC. OCC. FAIR PRICE SHOP DEALER OF THE SHOP NO.1348029, VENGALAMPALLI VILLAGE, PEAPULLY MANDAL, NANDHAYALA DISTRICT. ...PETITIONER(S) AND 1. THE STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH, REPRESENTED BY ITS PRINCIPAL SECRETARY, HOME (POLICE) DEPARTMENT ANDHRA PRADESH SECRETARIAT OFFICE, VELAGAPUDI, AMRAVATI. 2. THE DIRECTOR GENERAL OF POLICE, STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH, MANGALGIRI, AMARAVATHI. 3. THE SUPERINTENDENT OF POLICE, NANDHAYLA DISTRICT, NANDHYALA. 2 4. THE SUBDIVISIONAL POLICE OFFICER, , DHONE DIVISION NANDHYALA DISTRICT. 5. THE CIRCLE INSPECTOR OF POLICE, , PEAPULLY POLICE STATION, NANDHYALA DISTRICT. 6. THE STATION HOUSE OFFICER, PEAPULLY POLICE STATION NANDHYALA DISTRICT. 7. THE REVENUE DIVISIONAL OFFICER, PEAPULLY MANDAL NANDHYALA 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 to Issue a Writ of Mandamus or any other appropriate writ, order, or direction declaring inaction of the Respondents, more particularly the 5th and 6th Respondent Police Officers, in calling us to the police station and threatening us to resign for the fair price dealer authorization as arbitrary, illegal, and contrary to well-established legal principles, apart from being violative of the provisions of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (BNSS), A.P.S.T.C.D.S Order, 2018 and consequently direct the Respondents not to call us to the police station for the purpose of settlement of civil disputes and Pass IA NO: 1 OF 2025 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 interfere with Petitioners discharge of their duties as the fair price shop dealers, pending disposal of the Writ Petition and pass Counsel for the Petitioner(S): 1. PAPUDIPPU SASHIDAR REDDY Counsel for the Respondent(S): 1. GP FOR HOME 2. GP FOR CIVIL SUPPLIES 3 THE HONOURABLE DR JUSTICE VENKATA JYOTHIRMAI PRATAPA WRIT PETITION NO: 31343 of 2025 ORDER: This Writ Petition is filed under Article 226 of Constitution of India with the following prayer for: “…to Issue a Writ of Mandamus or any other appropriate writ, order, or direction declaring inaction of the Respondents, more particularly the 5th and 6th Respondent Police Officers, in calling us to the police station and threatening us to resign for the fair price dealer authorization as arbitrary, illegal, and contrary to well-established legal principles, apart from being violative of the provisions of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (BNSS), A.P.S.T.C.D.S Order, 2018 and consequently direct the Respondents not to call us to the police station for the purpose of settlement of civil disputes and Pass.…” 2. Heard Sri Papudippu Sashidar Reddy, learned Counsel for the Petitioners and Sri V.Farook, learned Assistant Government Pleader for Home for the Official Respondents. 3. Learned Assistant Government Pleader for Home, on written instructions, would submit that the Police are not interfering in the business activities of the Petitioners and they are not calling the Petitioners to the Police Station. 4. Learned Counsel for the Petitioners would submit that recording the same, the petition may be disposed of. 5. Recording the same, this Writ Petition is disposed of. However, the Police are directed not to call the Petitioners to the Police Station in absence 4 of any crime registered against the Petitioners. There shall be no order as to costs. As a sequel thereto, miscellaneous petitions pending, if any, shall stand closed. _________________________________________ Dr. JUSTICE VENKATA JYOTHIRMAI PRATAPA Date: 21.11.2025. UPS 5 HON’BLE DR. JUSTICE VENKATA JYOTHIRMAI PRATAPA W.P.No.31343 of 2025 Dated.21.11.2025 UPS 193