Research › Search › Judgment

High Court of Andhra Pradesh · body

2026 DAILYLAW 4505 (AP)

Talari Rama Krishna v. The State of A.P.

WP/7741/2015 · 2026-06-30

Subba Reddy Satti

body2026

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

Date of reserved for orders : ---- Date of pronouncement : 01.07.2026 Date of uploading : APHC010721552015 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) [3331] WEDNESDAY, THE 1st DAY OF JULY 2026 PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE SUBBA REDDY SATTI WRIT PETITION NO: 7741/2015 Between: 1. TALARI RAMA KRISHNA, S/O BAYANNA, AGED 42 YEARS, F.P.SHOP DEALER , SHOP NO.36, NARPALA VILLAGE NARPALA MANDAL, ANANTAPURAM DISTRICT. ...PETITIONER AND 1. THE STATE OF A P, REP.BY ITS PRINCIPAL SECRETARY, CONSUMER AFFAIRS, FOOD AND CIVIL SUPPLIES DEPARTMENT, SECRETARIAT, HYDERABAD. 2. THE REVENUE DIVISIONAL OFFICER, ANANTAPURAM, ANANTAPURAM DISTRICT. 3. THE TAHSILDAR, NARPALA MANDAL, ANANTAPURAM 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 a Writ Order or Direction more particularly one in the nature WRIT of MANDAMUS declaring the impugned order passed by the 2nd respondent in RC.DICS/222/2015 dated 11-03-2015 as illegal, arbitrary, violation of Principles of Natural Justice and consequently direct the respondents to continue the petitioner as FP Shop Dealer of Shop No.36 of Narpala Village & Mandal, Anantapuram District IA NO: 1 OF 2015(WPMP 10236 OF 2015 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 to direct the respondents 2 and 3 to continue the petitioner as FP Shop Dealer, Shop No.36 of Narpala Village & Mandal, Anantapuram District by suspending the impugned proceedings passed by the 2nd respondent made in RC.DICS/222/.2015 dated 11-03-2015 pending disposal of the main Writ Petition Counsel for the Petitioner: 1. GANDURI NAGESWARA RAO Counsel for the Respondent(S): 1. GP FOR CIVIL SUPPLIES (AP) The Court made the following: :: ORDER :: The writ petition was listed on 17.06.2026. There was no representation on behalf of the petitioner, and at the request of learned Assistant Government Pleader for Civil Supplies, the matter was adjourned to 24.06.2026. On 24.06.2026 also, there was no representation on behalf of the petitioner. Hence, the matter was directed to be listed today under the caption ‘for dismissal’. 2. Even today also there is no representation on behalf of the petitioner. It appears that the petitioner is not interested in prosecuting the writ petition. 3. Accordingly, the Writ Petition is dismissed for non-prosecution. No costs. No order as to costs. As a sequel, pending miscellaneous petitions, if any, shall stand closed. ___________________________ JUSTICE SUBBA REDDY SATTI Date: 01.07.2026 TVN Whether the order is : Speaking Yes/No / Reasoned Yes/No Reportable Yes/No / Non-Reportable Yes/No 40 THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE SUBBA REDDY SATTI WRIT PETITION No.7741 OF 2015 Date: 01.07.2026 TVN