Dismissed¶28

Guntu Rama Rao v. The State of Andhra Pradesh

Andhra Pradesh HC9 Sept 2025WP/8585/2020

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Fair Price Shop authorization cancelled; FP Shop No. 0129025, Patha Meghavaram Village, Santhabommali Mandal, Srikakulam District; SR.No.140/2019-S5 dated 18.12.2019; report under Section 6(A), Essential Commodities Act, 1955; Andhra Pradesh State Targeted Public Distribution System (Control) Order, 2018; writ of mandamus under Article 226; IA No. 1 of 2020 under Section 151 CPC; dismissed as infructuous; no order as to costs; pending IAs closed; Justice V. Sujatha; High Court of Andhra Pradesh at Amaravati; order dated 10.09.2025.

What did the court decide?

No relief granted; writ petition dismissed as infructuous with no order as to costs, and as a sequel, interlocutory applications pending, if any, were directed to stand closed. ¶28

Guntu Rama Rao Vs The State of Andhra Pradesh — Writ and Judicial Review | Andhra Pradesh HC (2025)

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

No relief granted; writ petition dismissed as infructuous with no order as to costs, and as a sequel, interlocutory applications pending, if any, were directed to stand closed.

¶28

Issue for consideration

Whether the action of the 2nd respondent in cancelling the authorization of the petitioner's Fair Price Shop No. 0129025 of Patha Meghavaram Village vide SR.No.140/2019-S5 dated 18.12.2019, based on a report under Section 6(A) of the EC Act, 1955, was illegal, arbitrary and violative of the Andhra Pradesh State Targeted Public Distribution System (Control) Order, 2018 and the principles of natural justice. +1 more

¶17

Ratio / Principle

The Court recorded the submission of learned counsel appearing for the petitioner that the cause in the writ petition does not survive and the matter has become infructuous.

¶27

Key takeaways

Recording the above submission, the Writ Petition is dismissed as infructuous and there shall be no order as to costs.ratio¶28

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Writ Petition No. 8585 of 2020 (Article 226, Andhra Pradesh High Court at Amaravati) challenged the cancellation by the 2nd respondent, vide SR.No.140/2019-S5 dated 18.12.2019, of the authorization of the petitioner's Fair Price Shop No. 0129025 of Patha Meghavaram Village, Santhabommali Mandal, Srikakulam District, founded on a report under Section 6(A) of the EC Act, 1955; the cancellation was assailed as illegal, arbitrary, violative of the Andhra Pradesh State Targeted Public Distribution System (Control) Order, 2018 and of the principles of natural justice. IA No. 1 of 2020 under Section 151 CPC had sought suspension of the cancellation proceedings pending disposal of the petition. At the hearing, counsel appearing for the petitioner submitted that the cause in the writ petition did not survive and the matter had become infructuous. Recording the submission, V. Sujatha, J. (order dated 10.09.2025) dismissed the writ petition as infructuous, made no order as to costs, and closed pending interlocutory applications, if any. No findings were rendered on the legality of the cancellation; the disposal rests solely on infructuosity.

¶1

APHC010142232020

¶2

[3333]

¶3

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

¶4

WEDNESD A Y, THE TENTH DAY OF SEPTEMB E R TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE

¶5

PRESENT

¶6

THE HONOURABLE SMT JUSTICE V.SUJATHA WRIT PETITION NO: 8585/2020

¶7

Between:

¶8

GUNTU RAMA R A O, FATHER NAME S/O APPANNA AGE 51 ADDRESS GUNTU RAMA RAO, S/OAPPANNA, AGED 5 1YEARS,OCC F.P.SHOP DEAL E R, R/O D.NO. 6-45, PATHA M EGHAVARAM VILLAGE, SANTH A BOMMALI MANDAL, SRIKAKUL A M DISTRICT532211

¶9

...PETITIONER

¶10

AND

¶11

THE STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH, REP. B Y PRINCIPAL SECRETARY, CI V IL SUPPLIES DEPARTMENT, VELAGAPUDI, AMARAVATHI.

¶12

THE DISTRICT C OLLECTOR/JOINT COLLECTOR, SRIKAKULAM DISTRICT, SRIKA K ULAM.

¶13

THE TAHSILDA R , SANTHABOMMALI MANDAL, SRIKAKULAM DISTRICT-532195

¶14

...RESPONDENT(S):

¶15

Petition under Artic l e 226 of the Constitution of India pr a ying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed therewith, the Hig h Court may be pleased topleased to is s ue a writ order or direction, more p a rticularly one in the nature of WRIT OF MANDAMUS, declaring the action of the 2ndrespondent in cancelling the authorization of the petitioner FP Shop No 0129025 of Patha Meghavaram Village, Santhabommali Ma n dal, Srikakulam District in SR.No.140/ 2 019-S5 dated 18.12.2019, basing on the report

¶16

¶17

U/Sec.6(A) of the EC Act, 1955 is illegal, arbitrary, violation of Andhra Pradesh State Targeted Public Distribution System (Control) Order, 2018 and violation of the principles of natural justice and consequently set aside the same and pass such

¶18

IA NO: 1 OF 2020

¶19

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 pleased to suspend the proceedings vide SR.No.140/2019-S5 dated 18.12.2019 passed by the 2nd respondent, by permitting the petitioner to supply the Essential Commodities to the eligible card holders from the petitioner’s Fair Price Shop No. 0129025 of Patha Meghavaram Village, Santhabommali Mandal, Srikakulam District, pending disposal of the above writ petition, and

¶20

Counsel for the Petitioner:

¶21

1.M LAKSHMI NARAYANA

¶22

Counsel for the Respondent(S):

¶23

1.GP FOR CIVIL SUPPLIES (AP)

¶24

¶25

The Court made the following Order:

¶26

Sri Burlu Chandra Sekhar, learned counsel representing

¶27

Sri M.Lakshmi Narayana, learned counsel for the petitioner stated that the cause in the writ petition does not survive and the matter has become infructuous.

¶28

Recording the above submission, the Writ Petition is dismissed as infructuous. There shall be no order as to costs.

¶29

As a sequel, Interlocutory Applications pending, if any, shall stand closed.

¶30

__________________ JUSTICE V.SUJATHA

¶31

Dated: 10.09.2025 MDP

Guntu Rama Rao v. The State of Andhra Pradesh

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Guntu Rama Rao v. The State of Andhra Pradesh

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Why is it important?

What the court decided

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Shaik Noor Ahamad Vs The State of Andhra Pradesh

L Ramesh Vs the Sate of Ap

M/s N.V. Electricals, Vs .The State of Andhra Pradesh

Dr. B.R. B.R. Ambedkar Educational and Charitable Origination. Vs The State of Andhra Pradesh

Sri Ruppa Srinivasa Rao Vs The State of Andhra Pradesh

Kottapalli Gowramma Vs The State of Andhra Pradesh