M/s.Water Shield Technologies v. THE STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH
WP/2106/2026 · 2026-01-26
Gannamaneni Ramakrishna Prasad
body2026
DailyLaw.ai
[ 2026 DAILYLAW 15241 (AP) · dailylaw.ai ]
DailyLaw.ai
[ 2026 DAILYLAW 15241 (AP) · dailylaw.ai ]
Judgment text
Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.
1 APHC010031692026 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) [3328] TUESDAY,THE TWENTY SEVENTH DAY OF JANUARY TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY SIX PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE GANNAMANENI RAMAKRISHNA PRASAD WRIT PETITION NO: 2106/2026 Between:
1.M/S.WATER SHIELD TECHNOLOGIES,, PARTNERSHIP FIRM, PLOT NO.30, CHEERYALA VILLAGE, KEESARA, HYDERABAD, MEDCHAL- MALKAJGIRI DISTRICT, TELANGANA, REP. BY ITS PARTNER/AUTHORISED PERSON SRI. P. V. V. S. S. S. S. R.
PRASAD, S/O. P. V. SUBRAHMANYAM, AGED 54 YEARS, R/O.LIG 493, MEERPET, APHB COLONY, MOULA ALI, RANGAREDDY DISTRICT, HYDERABAD, TELANGANA. ...PETITIONER AND 1.THE STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH, REP. BY ITS PRINCIPAL SECRETARY, DEPARTMENT OF MUNICIPAL ADMINISTRATION AND URBAN DEVELOPMENT, SECRETARIAT, VELAGAPUDI, AMARAVATI, GUNTUR DISTRICT.
2.TIRUPATI URBAN DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY TUDA, TIRUPATI, REP. BY ITS VICE-CHAIRMAN, OFFICE AT TILAK ROAD, KOTRAMANGALAM, TIRUPATI. ...RESPONDENT(S): Counsel for the Petitioner:
1.K JYOTHI PRASAD Counsel for the Respondent(S):
1.GP MUNCIPAL ADMN AND URBAN DEV AP 2.Karri kalyan Durga Prasad SC FOR TUDA
2 The Court made the following:
ORAL ORDER: Heard Sri K. Jyothi Prasad, learned Counsel for the Writ Petitioner and Sri K.K. Durga Prasad, learned Standing Counsel for Respondent No.2.
2. Sri K.K. Durga Prasad, learned Standing Counsel for Respondent No.2, has submitted a Corrigendum issued by the Executive Engineer, Tirupati Urban Development Authority dated 21.01.2026. Copy of it is supplied to the
learned Counsel for the Writ Petitioner and the same is taken on record.
3.
Learned Counsel for the Writ Petitioner, having sifted through the Corrigendum, would submit that the needful has been done and no further
consideration is necessary, inasmuch as the liability criteria has been duly amended.
4. Having recorded the same, this Writ Petition is disposed of. No order as to costs.
5. Interlocutory Applications, if any, stand closed in terms of this order. ______________________________________ GANNAMANENI RAMAKRISHNA PRASAD, J Dt:27.01.2026 Vns