Dismissed¶27

Megasphere LLP v. the State of Andhra Pradesh

Andhra Pradesh HC9 Dec 2025WP/14335/2025

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

APHC Writ Petition No. 14335 of 2025, decided 10.12.2025, High Court of Andhra Pradesh at Amaravati, Justice Tarlada Rajasekhar Rao. Megasphere LLP v. State of Andhra Pradesh (Prohibition & Excise Department) and A.P. Beverages Corporation Ltd. Challenge to rejection of application under Tender/Offer ID 771318 for supply of foreign liquor (Article 226 petition; IA Nos. 1 and 2 of 2025 under Section 151 CPC). Dismissed for non-prosecution — petitioner unrepresented when listed under caption 'for dismissal'. No order as to costs; miscellaneous petitions closed.

What did the court decide?

Absence of any representation for the petitioner when the writ petition was listed under the caption 'for dismissal' indicated that the petitioner was not interested in prosecuting the writ petition. ¶26

Megasphere LLP Vs the State of Andhra Pradesh — Writ and Judicial Review | Andhra Pradesh HC (2025)

¶1

[3330]

¶2

APHC010285292025

¶3

IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction)

¶4

WEDNESDAY, THE TENTH DAY OF DECEMBER TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE PRESENT

¶5

THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE TARLADA RAJASEKHAR RAO WRIT PETITION NO: 14335/2025

¶6

Between:

¶7

MEGASPHERE LLP, H.NO. 1-9-2, TEMPLE ALWAL, NR SHIVALAYAM, ALWAL, TIRUMALAGIRI, HYDERABAD-500010. REPRESENTED BY ITS MANAGING DIRECTOR MUDDALA SAI KUMAR.

¶8

...PETITIONER

¶9

AND

¶10

THE STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH, PROHIBITION AND EXCISE DEPARTMENT MANGALAGIRI,GIMTUR DISTRICT., A.P. REPRESENTED BY ITS. PRINCIPAL SECRETARY.

¶11

ANDHRA PRADESH BEVERAGES CORPORATION LTD, 3RD FLOOR, IHC CORPORATE, MANGALAGIRI GUNTUR, ANDHRA PRADESH. REPRESENTED BY ITS. MANAGING DIRECTOR

¶12

...RESPONDENT(S):

¶13

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 declaring the action of the 2nd respondent in not considering the petitioner's company application for Tender ID 771318, invitation of offer to supply of foreign liquor on par with other bidders is illegal, arbitrary and consequently direct the 2nd respondent to receive the offline documents and process the same along with the other bidders and to pass

¶14

IA NO: 1 OF 2025

¶15

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 No 2 to consider the case of petitioner company for the Tender ID 771318, invitation of offer to supply of foreign liquor duly receiving offline payment documents to process on par with other bidders, and pass orders, and pass IA NO: 2 OF 2025

¶16

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 permit to amend the existing prayer from <pleased to issue an appropriate Writ, Order or direction more

¶17

¶18

particularly one in the nature of Writ of Mandamus declaring the action of the 2nd respondent in not considering the petitioner?s companyapplication for Tender ID 771318, invitation of offer to supply of foreign liquor on par with other bidders is illegal, arbitrary and consequently direct the 2nd respondent to receive the offline documents and process the same along with the other bidders and to pass= Prayer amendment to <It is therefore prayed that the Hon?ble Court may be pleased to issue a Writ of Mandamus or any other appropriate Writ or Order or Direction, declaring the action of the respondents in rejecting the petitioner company application for OFFER ID 771318, invitation of offer to supply of foreign liquor, is illegal, arbitrary, high handedness consequently direct the respondents to accept the petitioner company application on par with other participants duly accepting offline documents and to pass Counsel for the Petitioner:

¶19

1.RAAVILLA GOPALA KRISHNA

¶20

Counsel for the Respondent(S):

¶21

1.GP FOR PROHIBITION EXCISE

¶22

2.V SRINIVASULA REDDY The Court made the following:

¶23

¶24

THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE TARLADA RAJASEKHAR RAO WRIT PETITION No.14335 of 2025

¶25

ORDER:

¶26

Despite the writ petition being listed under the caption >for dismissal?, there is no representation on behalf of the petitioner. Hence, it indicates that the petitioner is not interested in prosecuting the writ petition.

¶27

Therefore, the Writ Petition is dismissed for non prosecution.

¶28

There shall be no order as to costs.

¶29

As a sequel thereto, miscellaneous petitions pending, if any, shall stand closed.

¶30

__________________________________ JUSTICE TARLADA RAJASEKHAR RAO

¶31

Date: 10.12.2025

¶32

KBN