Research › Search › Judgment

High Court of Andhra Pradesh · body

2025 DAILYLAW 6356 (AP)

SK SUBANI v. THE STATE OF AP

WP/2684/2019 · 2025-08-11

B V L N Chakravarthi

body2025

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

APHC010058632019 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) [3368] TUESDAY,THE TWELFTH DAY OF AUGUST TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE B V L N CHAKRAVARTHI WRIT PETITION NO: 2684/2019 Between: 1. SK SUBANI, R/O. MACHAVARAM VILLAGE 85 MANDAL, GUNTUR DISTRICT. ...PETITIONER AND 1. THE STATE OF AP, REP. BY ITS PRINCIPAL SECRETARY, HOME DEPARTMENT, SECRETARIAT, VELAGAPUDI, GUNTUR DISTRICT 2. THE STATION HOUSE OFFICER, MACHAVARAM POLICE STATION, MACHAVARM, GUNTUR DISTRICT 3. THE PANCHAYAT SECRETARY, MACHAVARAM GRAM PANCHAYAT 8S MANDAL, GUNTUR DISTRICT ...RESPONDENT(S): Counsel for the Petitioner: 1. K RATHANGA PANI REDDY Counsel for the Respondent(S): 1. GP FOR HOME (AP) 2. G SESHADRI(SC FOR MPP ZPP) The Court made the following: 2 THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE B.V.L.N.CHAKRAVARTHI WRIT PETITION No.2684 OF 2019 ORDER: This Writ Petition is filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India for the following relief: “….to issue an appropriate writ, order or direction more particularly one in the nature Writ of Mandamus, declaring the illegal action of the respondents 2 and 3 in interfering with petitioner's business of running chicken shop in D.No. 304/1 facing the Machavaram-Piduguralla road, Machavaram Village 85 Mandal, Guntur District and further action of the 2nd respondent in resorting to close the petitioner chicken shop without authority of law as illegal, arbitrary and violative of articles 14, 19(1)(g), 21 and 300-A of the Constitution of India and pass…” 2. Learned counsel for the Writ Petitioner would submit that at this length of time, the cause of action does not survive for further adjudication. 3. Learned counsel for the petitioner would further submit that in the light of above submissions made by the learned Additional Public Prosecutor, the writ petition may be closed, as no further orders are required at this length of time. 4. Considering the above submissions, the writ petition is closed at the stage of admission, without going into merits of the case. 3 5. Accordingly, the Writ Petition is closed. There shall be no order as to costs. As a sequel thereto, interlocutory applications, if any, pending in this Writ Petition shall stand closed. ______________________________ JUSTICE B.V.L.N. CHAKRAVARTHI 12.08.2025 SR 4 THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE B.V.L.N. CHAKRAVARTHI WRIT PETITION No:2684 OF 2019 Date: 12.08.2025 SR