APHC010223032025 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) [3330] TUESDAY, THE TWENTIETH DAY OF JANUARY TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY SIX PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE TARLADA RAJASEKHAR RAO WRIT PETITION NO: 11372/2025 Between: 1. MUTYALA GANI RAJU, S/O.M. SATTIRAJU, AGED ABOUT 69 YRS, OCC- BUSINESS, D.NO.4-20-1/1C, SRINAGAR 1ST, MANDAPETA V.TC MANDAPETA, EAST GODAVARI-533308. ...PETITIONER AND 1. THE STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH, REP. BY PRINCIPAL SECRETARY, PROHIBITION AND EXCISE DEPARTMENT, SECRETARIAT BUILDINGS, VELAGAPUDI, AMARAVATHI, GUNTUR DISTRICT. 2. THE DIRECTOR/COMMISSIONER, PROHIBITION AND EXCISE DEPARTMENT MANGALAGIRI, GUNTUR DISTRICT 3. THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER, PROHIBITIONAND EXCISE DEPARTMENT KAKINADA. 4. THE DISTRICT PROHIBITION AND EXCISE OFFICER, AMALAPURAM.(KONASEMA DST) 5. THE STATION HOUSE OFFICER, PROHIBITION AND EXCISE, ALAMAURRU. 6. ANNMAREDDI SOMA RAJU, S/O. ESWARUDU, NOT KNOWN, OCC- BUSINEESS @ 31-9-57/13, MANDAPETA MUNCIPALITY, RESIDENCE @ D. NO. 1-39/A, MAIN.ROAD, AGE TIRUGUDUMETTA, VTC TIRUGUDUMETTA PO, TALIAPUDI, WEST 2 GODAVARI 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 an appropriate Writ, Order or direction more particularly one in the nature of Writ of Mandamus declare the inaction of the part of the respondents without considering the Representation/objections dt 08-04-2025 And 12-04-2025 submitted by the petitioner, is nothing but illegal, arbitrary, abuse of process of law and is a clear case of violation of principles of natural justice, contrary to law laid down in Kranti Associates (P) Ltd V. Masood Ahmed Khan reported in 2010 (9) see 496, Violation of Article 14 and 19 of the Constitution of India also contrary to the Rule 26 of The Andhra Pradesh Excise (Grant of License of and Seling by Shop and Conditions of License ) Rules - 2024, and consequently direct the respondents to consider my representations dt-08-04-2025 And12-04- 2025 by the 2nd respondent, 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 may be pleased to direct the respondents not to grant shifting orders to the 6th respondent, pending disposal of the writ petition, and pass Counsel for the Petitioner: 1. GINJUPALLI SUBBA RAO Counsel for the Respondent(S): 1. GP FOR PROHIBITION EXCISE 2. G JHANSI 3 THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE TARLADA RAJASEKHAR RAO WRIT PETITION NO: 11372/2025 The Court made the following Order: Sri T. Ramesh Babu, learned counsel representing Sri Ginjupalli Subba Rao, learned counsel for the petitioner seeks permission of this Court for withdrawal of the Writ Petition. The learned counsel has made an endorsement on the bundle to that extent. 2. Permission is accorded. 3. Accordingly, the Writ Petition is dismissed as Withdrawn. There shall be no order as to costs. As a sequel thereto, miscellaneous Petitions pending, if any, shall stand closed. _____________________________ TARLADA RAJASEKHAR RAO, J Dated: 20.01.2026 MSI 4 THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE TARLADA RAJASEKHAR RAO WRIT PETITION NO: 11372/2025 Dated: 20.01.2026 MSI