Writ petition seeking issuance of a No Objection Certificate for a retail petroleum outlet was closed after counsel stated the cause did not survive due to subsequent developments.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
APHC010409832019
IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI
(Special Original Jurisdiction)
[3494]
TUESDAY, THE TWENTY SECOND DAY OF OCTOBE R TWO T H OUSAND AND TWENTY FOUR
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE NINALA JAYASURYA THE HONOURABLE SMT JUSTICE SUMATHI JAGADAM
WRIT PETITION No.19912 of 2019
Between:
AND
2
wp_19912_2019
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 OF MANDAMUS or any other appropriate writ, order or direction to declare the inaction of Respondents No. 2 to 6 in issuing No Objection Certificate (NOC) for setting up a retail petroleum outlet MS/HSDRO in an extent of 900 sq. meters, covered by Survey No.54/1 8s 2 correlated to 54/2A, Kodumuru Village 8s Mandalam, Kurnool district as per LOI dated 18.03.2019 in Reference No.M/2018/IN001830/AP/000136/4404/00046 issued by the Respondent No.7 is illegal, arbitrary, unconstitutional and contrary to Rule 144 Petroleum rules, 2002 and consequently command the respondents to issue NOC to the petitioner
IA NO: 1 OF 2019
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 Respondent Nos.2 to 6 to consider my case for issuance of No Objection Certificate forthwith for the purpose of setting up retail petroleum outlet in an extent of Ac.0-50 cents covered by Survey No.54/1 86 2 correlated to 54/2A in Kodumuru Village 86 Mandalam, Kurnool district
Counsel for the Petitioner:
Counsel for the Respondents:
The Court made the following ORDER:
At the time of considering the matter, it is represented by Mr.P.Raja Sekhar, learned counsel for the petitioner that in view of the subsequent developments, the cause in the writ petition does not survive for adjudication.
3
wp_19912_2019
NINALA JAYASURYA,J
SUMATHI JAGADAM,J
October 22, 2024. vasu
Chandrika Veera Reddy
The State of Andhra Pradesh
The District Collector and Magistrate, Kurnool
Superintendent of Police, Kurnool
The District Fire Officer, Kurnool
Mandal Revenue Officer, Kodumuru
Ninala Jayasurya
Sumathi Jagadam
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
