APHC010067762026 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) [3209] TUESDAY,THE SEVENTEENTH DAY OF FEBRUARY TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY SIX PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE NINALA JAYASURYA WRIT PETITION NO: 3876/2026 Between: 1. D. SAINATH REDDY,, S/O. D. SUBBA REDDY, AGED ABOUT 25 YEARS, OCC. PROPRIETOR / CEO, R/O. H.NO.28-2A-10F, ASHOK NAGAR, NANDYAL, NANDYAL (ERSTWHILE KURNOOL) DISTRICT. ...PETITIONER AND 1. THE STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH, REP BY ITS PRINCIPAL SECRETARY, GAD (I AND PR), DEPARTMENT, SECRETARIAT, VELAGAPUDI, GUNTUR DIST. 2. THE COMMISSIONER, I AND PR DEPARTMENT, 2ND FLOOR, NTR ADMINISTRATIVE BLOCK, PANDIT NEHRU BUS STAND, VIJAYAWADA KRISHNA DISTRICT. 3. THE DISTRICT I AND PR OFFICER, I AND PR DEPARTMENT, NANDYAL, NANDYAL DISTRICT. 4. THE DISTRICT COLLECTOR, NANDYAL, NANDYAL DISTRICT. 5. NDL NEW 9, NANDYALA, NANDYAL DISTRICT 6. TARAK TV, NANDYALA, NANDYAL DISTRICT ...RESPONDENT(S): Counsel for the Petitioner: 1. VADAPALLI RAMESH Counsel for the Respondent(S): 1. GP FOR GENERAL ADMINISTRATION NJS,J W.P No.3876 of 2026 2 The Court made the following Order: The present writ petition is filed seeking to declare the action of the respondent Nos.2 and 4 in not taking action against the proposed allotment of Electronic Media accreditation in favour of the unofficial respondents as per the guidelines issued by the Government vide G.O.Ms.No.84 GA (I&PR) Department, dated 19.08.2025 as illegal, arbitrary, etc., and for consequential directions to the respondents to strictly follow the said guidelines. 2. The learned counsel for the petitioner while making submissions with reference to the averments made in the affidavit filed in support of the writ petition has drawn the attention of this Court to the G.O.Ms.No.84 dated 19.08.2025. He also submits that as the respondent authorities contrary to the said guidelines set out in the said G.O. are granting Electrical Media accreditation in favour of the unofficial respondents, the petitioner made representation dated 29.11.2025, etc., and despite the same, no action was taken. Therefore, the petitioner is constrained to file the present writ petition. 3. Though the learned counsel sought to make further submissions, this Court in the light of the written instructions received by Smt. A Jayanthi, learned Government Pleader representing the respondent Nos.1 to 3, a copy of which is placed for perusal of this Court, is not inclined to examine the matter in detail. 4. In the written instructions, it is inter alia stated that the petitioner is ineligible for accreditation under the statutory provisions of Rule 10(f) of G.O.Ms.No.84, as the said rule explicitly mandates that Cable Network Channels without their own running cable must have been registered with A.P.Fiber Net before September, 2022 to qualify for accreditation in the district. It is also admitted case of the petitioner that he is not qualified. Be that as it may. NJS,J W.P No.3876 of 2026 3 5. In the written instructions, it is specifically stated that on comprehensive physical verification conducted by the District Public Relations Officer (DIPRO), Nandyal i.e., respondent No.3 on 11.01.2026 and the report submitted by him, the unofficial respondent Nos.5 and 6 i.e., NDL News 9 and TARAK TV did not possess their own running cables and in view of the same, no accreditation is being extended to the unofficial respondents. 6. The learned Government Pleader further submits that the applications received by the department are under process and appropriate orders would be passed on the individual applications. 7. In the light of the written instructions which are placed on record, this Writ Petition is closed. No costs. Miscellaneous petitions pending, if any, shall stand closed. __________________________ JUSTICE NINALA JAYASURYA Date:17.02.2026 Ksj