APHC010088712026 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) [3330] THURSDAY,THE FIFTH DAY OF MARCH TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY SIX PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE TARLADA RAJASEKHAR RAO WRIT PETITION NO: 4879/2026 Between: 1. G V SESHAPHANI REDDY, S/O. LATE G.V. RAMI REDDY, AGED ABOUT 62 YEARS, R/O. H26-343-E, M.S. NAGAR, NANDYAL, NANDYAL DISTRICT ...PETITIONER AND 1. THE STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH, REP. BY ITS PRINCIPAL SECRETARY, PROHIBITION EXCISE DEPARTMENT, SECRETARIAT, VELAGAPUDI, GUNTUR DISTRICT- 522238 2. THE COMMISSIONER, GOVERNMENT OF ANDHRA PRADESH, PROHIBITION AND EXCISE, IBRAHIMPATNAM, NTR DISTRICT- 521456 3. THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER, PROHIBITION AND EXCISE, KURNOOL, KURNOOL DISTRICT- 518001 4. THE DISTRICT PROHIBITION AND EXCISE OFFICER, NANDYAL DISTRICT, NANDYAL- 518501 5. G SAINATH REDDY, S/O. G. OBULA REDDY, AGED ABOUT 60 YEARS, R/O. H.NO. 25-191, ROYAL HOMES, SANJEEVNAGAR, NANDYAL, NANDYAL DISTRICT-518501 ...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 2 pleased topleased to issue an appropriate writ, order or direction more particularly one in the nature of Writ of Mandamus, declaring the inaction of the 4th respondent in not cancelling the provisional license, dated 01.09.2025 issued in favour of the 5threspondent to run the bar and restaurant in the petitioner premises bearing Door No. 25-24, Sanjeevanagar, RS Road, Nandyal though there is no lease deed of the premises as required under rule 25 F of Andhra Pradesh Excise (Grant of License of Selling by Bar and Conditions of License) Rules, 2025, as illegal, arbitrary and contrary to the provisions of law and rules and consequently direct the 4th respondent to cancel the aforesaid provisional license by stopping supply of liquor to the 5th respondent and pass IA NO: 1 OF 2026 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 pleased to direct the 4th respondent to forthwith stop the supply of liquor to 5th respondent bar and restaurant located in the petitioner premises bearing No. 25-24, Sanjeeva Nagar, RS Road, Nandyal , pending disposal of the above Writ petition, and pass Counsel for the Petitioner: 1. K RATHANGA PANI REDDY Counsel for the Respondent(S): 1. GP FOR PROHIBITION EXCISE 2. B S REDDY The Court made the following: 3 THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE TARLADA RAJASEKHAR RAO WRIT PETITION No.4879 OF 2026 ORDER: The present Writ Petition is filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India seeking the following relief: “…to issue an appropriate writ, order or direction more particularly one in the nature of Writ of Mandamus, declaring the inaction of the 4th respondent in not cancelling the provisional license, dated 01.09.2025 issued in favour of the 5th respondent to run the bar and restaurant in the petitioner premises bearing Door No. 25-24, Sanjeevanagar, RS Road, Nandyal though there is no lease deed of the premises as required under rule 25 F of Andhra Pradesh Excise (Grant of License of Selling by Bar and Conditions of License) Rules, 2025, as illegal, arbitrary and contrary to the provisions of law and rules and consequently direct the 4th respondent to cancel the aforesaid provisional license by stopping supply of liquor to the 5th respondent and pass…” 2. Heard Sri K.Rathangapani Reddy, learned counsel for petitioner and Sri B.S.Reddy, learned counsel for the respondent No.5. 3. The writ petition is filed declaring the action of the 4th respondent in not cancelling the provisional license, dated 01.09.2025 issued in favour of the 5th respondent to run the bar and restaurant in the petitioner premises bearing Door No.25-24, Sanjeevanagar, RS Road, Nandyal though there is no lease deed of the premises as required under rule 25 F of Andhra Pradesh Excise (Grant of License of Selling by Bar and Conditions of License) Rules, 2025, exists as the lease granted in favour of the 5th respondent by the petitioner was lapsed/expired on 30.11.2025. 4 4. Learned counsel for the respondent No.5 has filed an affidavit undertaking that he will vacate the premises, if the Court grants six months time. 5. Without going into the merits of the case, and with the consent of both the learned counsels, this Writ Petition is disposed of by directing respondent No.5 to vacate the premises within a period of four (4) months, from the date of receipt of this order, failing which the petitioner is at liberty to seek police aid for dispossession of respondent No.5. Petitioner is directed not to dispossess the 5th respondent till 30.06.2026. Respondent No.5 is also directed to pay the arrears of rent to the petitioner either by way of cash or by banking instruments within a period of one (1) month from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. There shall no order as to costs. As a sequel thereto, miscellaneous petitions pending, if any, shall stand closed. __________________________________ JUSTICE TARLADA RAJASEKHAR RAO Date: 05.03.2026 MH/CMK 5 28 THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE TARLADA RAJASEKHAR RAO WRIT PETITION No.4879 of 2026 Date: 05.03.2026 MH/CMK