Dismissed¶33

B Dilleswara Rao v. the State of Andhra Pradesh

Andhra Pradesh HC19 Jul 2026WP/19718/2026

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Withdrawal of writ petition; dismissed as withdrawn; liberty to file fresh writ petition; mistakes in writ petition; Article 226 Constitution of India; writ of mandamus; Section 151 CPC; IA No.1 of 2026; shifting of A4 licence shop; G.O.Ms.No.210 Revenue (Excise) Department dated 30-09-2024; Section 53-A of the Andhra Pradesh Excise Act; Srikakulam district; Madhu Bar and Restaurant Wine Shop; District Prohibition and Excise Officer; no order as to costs; miscellaneous petitions closed; no merits adjudication; not citable as precedent on excise licensing.

What did the court decide?

Dismissal of the Writ Petition as withdrawn, with liberty to file a fresh Writ Petition and no order as to costs. ¶33

B Dilleswara Rao Vs the State of Andhra… — Writ and Judicial Review | Andhra Pradesh HC (2026)

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

Dismissal of the Writ Petition as withdrawn, with liberty to file a fresh Writ Petition and no order as to costs.

¶33

Issue for consideration

Whether the respondents' failure to initiate action on shifting of the 5th respondent's A4 licence shop, said to violate the Rules laid down in G.O.Ms.No.210 Revenue (Excise) Department dated 30-09-2024, was arbitrary and illegal warranting a writ of mandamus and directions under Section 53-A of the Andhra Pradesh Excise Act - raised in the petition but not adjudicated, as the Writ Petition was withdrawn at the threshold.

¶21

Ratio / Principle

Permission was accorded to the petitioner to withdraw the Writ Petition.

¶32

Key takeaways

The Writ Petition was dismissed as withdrawn, granting liberty to the petitioner to file a fresh Writ Petition, with no order as to costs.ratio¶33
As a sequel, miscellaneous petitions pending, if any, stand closed.ratio¶34

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

High Court of Andhra Pradesh at Amaravati (Special Original Jurisdiction), single member bench of Justice Ravi Cheemalapati, order dated 20.07.2026 in Writ Petition No.19718 of 2026 (B Dilleswara Rao v. State of Andhra Pradesh and others). The petition, filed under Article 226 with an accompanying IA No.1 of 2026 under Section 151 CPC, had sought a writ of mandamus declaring arbitrary the respondents' inaction on shifting the 5th respondent's A4 licence shop, alleged to violate the Rules in G.O.Ms.No.210 Revenue (Excise) Department dated 30-09-2024, and directions to respondents 2 and 3 to exercise powers under Section 53-A of the Andhra Pradesh Excise Act. At the hearing, counsel for the petitioner submitted that certain mistakes had crept in the Writ Petition and sought leave to withdraw it with liberty to refile. Permission was accorded; the Writ Petition was dismissed as withdrawn with liberty to file a fresh Writ Petition; there was no order as to costs; and pending miscellaneous petitions stood closed. No issue of law or fact was adjudicated on the merits.

¶1

APHC010243622026

¶2

[3332]

¶3

IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI

¶4

(Special Original Jurisdiction)

¶5

MON D AY, THE 20^th DAY OF JULY 2026

¶6

PRESENT

¶7

THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE RAVI CHEEMALAPATI

¶8

WRIT PETITION NO: 19718/2026

¶9

Between:

¶10

B DILLESWARA R A O, S/O MOHAN RAO, AGED ABOUT 35 YEARS, OCC. BUSINESS, R/O HARIJAN STREET, SC COLO N Y, CB ROAD VILLAGE SECRE T ARIAT, OLD SRIKAKULAM, SRIKAKULAM DISTRICT.

¶11

...PETITIONER

¶12

AND

¶13

THE STATE OF A N DHRA PRADESH, REPRESENTED B Y PRINCIPAL SECRETARY, DEPARTMENT OF PROHIBITION A ND EXCISE, SECRETARIAT, V E LAGAPUDI, GUNTUR DISTRICT-22 5 03.

¶14

THE DISTRICT COLLECTOR, SRIKAKULAM DI S TRICT, AT SRIKAKULAM-532 0 01,

¶15

THE DISTRICT PR O HIBITION AND EXCISE OFFICER, SRIKAKULAM, SRIKAKULAM DIS T RICT-532001.

¶16

THE STATION HOUSE OFFICER, I TOWN POLI C E STATION, SRIKAKULAM-532 0 01.

¶17

MADHU BAR A N D RESTAURANT WINE SHOP, REP BY ITS PROPRIETOR, S RI MADHU ,0PP. SEETHARA M A TEMPLE, PONNADA BRIDG E , OLD SRIKAKULAM, SRIKAKUL A M DISTRICT532001.

¶18

...RESPONDENT(S):

¶19

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

¶20

¶21

pleased to issue an appropriate writ, order or direction more particularly one in the nature of Writ of Mandamus declaring the action of the respondents in not initiating action on shifting of the 5th respondent A4 license shop situated violating Rules laid down in G.O.Ms.No.210 Revenue (Excise) Department dated 30-09-2024. as arbitrary, illegal and in violation of The Andhra Pradesh Excise Act apart from being violative of rights guaranteed under the Constitution of India and consequently direct the 2nd and 3rd respondents to exercise the powers under Section 53-A of The Andhra Pradesh Excise Act and be pleased to pass

¶22

IA NO: 1 OF 2026

¶23

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 to shift the 5th respondent A4 license shop in the interest of justice and be pleased to pass

¶24

Counsel for the Petitioner:

¶25

1.SRAVAN KUMAR NAIDANA

¶26

Counsel for the Respondent(S):

¶27

1.GP FOR PROHIBITION EXCISE

¶28

2.GP FOR HOME

¶29

¶30

The Court made the following order:

¶31

Sri Sravan Kumar Naidana, learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that certain mistakes have crept in the Writ Petition and sought permission of this Court to withdraw the Writ Petition with liberty to file a fresh Writ Petition.

¶32

Permission, as sought for, is accorded.

¶33

Accordingly, the Writ Petition is dismissed as withdrawn granting liberty to the petitioner to file a fresh Writ Petition. There shall be no order as to costs.

¶34

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

¶35

____________________________

¶36

JUSTICE RAVI CHEEMALAPATI

20.07.2026