APHC010699592025 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) [3458] THURSDAY, THE EIGHTH DAY OF JANUARY TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY SIX PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SMT JUSTICE KIRANMAYEE MANDAVA WRIT PETITION NO: 36287 OF 2025 Between: 1. RAHUL RAJA REDDY, S/O R.GOPINANDH REDDY, AGE 44, R/O D.NO.22-278/2, LAWYERS COLONY, KATTANMANCHI, CHITTOOR, CHITTOOR DISTRICT. ...PETITIONER AND 1. THE STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH, REP.BY ITS PRINCIPAL SECRETARY ENDOWMENT DEPARTMENT, SECRETARIAT BUILDINGS, VELAGAPUDI, GUNTUR DISTRICT -522238. 2. THE COMMISSIONER OF ENDOWMENTS, VIJAYAWADA, NTR DISTRICT -50001. 3. THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER, ENDOWMENT DEPT, CHITTOOR DISTRICT -517001. 4. SRI OMKARA DYANA MANDHIRAM, REP. BY ITS EXECUTIVE OFFICER, I.D. ROAD, CHITTOOR, CHITTOOR DISTRICT -517001 ...RESPONDENT(S): Counsel for the Petitioner: Harinath Reddy Soma Counsel for the Respondents: GP for Endowments The Court made the following order: Heard Sri Harinath Reddy Soma, learned counsel for the petitioner, learned Assistant Government Pleader for Endowments appearing for the respondent Nos.1 to 3 and Sri T.Venu Gopal, learned Standing Counsel appearing for respondent No.4. 2 2. The grievance of the petitioner is against the action of the respondents in not considering the representation made by the petitioner dated 05.12.2025 for extension of the lease of the subject premises, i.e., D.No.10-306 and 10- 307, Gandhi Road, I.D. Road, Chittoor District, for a further period of five years. 3. It is contended that originally the petitioner was granted lease of the subject premises for a period of three years with effect from 01.12.2022 to 30.11.2025. After expiry of the same, the petitioner sought extension of the lease. 4. It is contended that on 01.12.2025, after the expiry of the lease period in favour of the petitioner, the 4th respondent issued an auction notification proposing to conduct a fresh auction. On coming to know, the petitioner submitted a representation on 05.12.2025 seeking extension of the lease. Without considering the said representation, the auction notice was issued and pursuant to the said auction notice. 5. It is contended that the respondents without considering the representation of the petitioner made prior in time, initiated the auction for granting liscence/leasehold rights in respect of the subject premises. Thus, the instant writ petition is filed. 6. Sri T.Venu Gopal, learned Standing Counsel appearing for respondent No.4, would submit that the so-called auction notice has not been issued by 3 the 4th respondent and as on date, the 4th respondent has not proposed for issuance of any auction notice. 7. Having regard to the contentions advanced, this Court deems it appropriate to dispose of the writ petition with a direction to the 4th respondent to pass appropriate orders on the representation of the petitioner dated 05.12.2025 within a period of four weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. 8. Accordingly, the Writ Petition is disposed of. There shall be no order as to costs. As a sequel, all pending miscellaneous applications shall stand closed. _____________________________ JUSTICE KIRANMAYEE MANDAVA Date: 08.01.2026 BSK 4 18 THE HONOURABLE SMT JUSTICE KIRANMAYEE MANDAVA WRIT PETITION NO: 36287 OF 2025 Date: 08.01.2026 BSK