Dismissed¶34

M/s.Prashanth Projects Limited v. The State of Andhra Pradesh

Andhra Pradesh HC14 Apr 2026WP/23346/2021

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Andhra Pradesh High Court, Amaravati; W.P. No. 23346/2021; K. Sreenivasa Reddy, J.; dismissed as infructuous; no order as to costs; petitioner withdrew/infructuous; police harassment allegation; detention of officers and employees; Rambilli Police Station; Sub Inspector Pusparaju Reddy; Indian Oil Corporation Limited project, Atchutapuram, Visakhapatnam; Article 226 Constitution of India; mandamus; security for project completion; miscellaneous applications closed.

What did the court decide?

On the submission of learned counsel for the petitioner that the cause in the writ petition does not survive and the matter has become infructuous, the Court recorded the submission and dismissed the writ petition as infructuous, with no order as to costs. ¶34

M/s.Prashanth Projects Limited Vs The State… — Writ and Judicial Review | Andhra Pradesh HC (2026)

[3327]

APHC010385632021

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

¶5

WEDNESDAY,THE FIFTEENTH DAY OF APRIL TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY SIX

¶6

PRESENT

¶7

THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE K SREENIVASA REDDY

¶8

WRIT PETITION NO: 23346/2021

¶9

Between:

¶10

M/S.PRASHANTH PROJECTS LIMITED, HAVING ITS REGD.OFFICE AT 406 408 A WING, HERMES ATRIUM, PLOT 57 SECTOR 11, CBD, BELAPUR, NAVI MUMBAI REPRESENTED BY ITS AUTHORISED SIGNATORY SRI. AJAY KUMAR S/O. HARGEN KUMAR AGED 45 YEARS OCC SERVICE R/O. VILLAGE POST DHANEYADAHACHAPPARA DIST. MUZAFFARPUR, BIHAR 843120.

¶11

...PETITIONER

¶12

AND

¶13

THE STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH, REPRESENTED BY ITS PRINCIPAL SECRETARY, HOME DEPARTMENT, A.P. SECRETARIAT, VELAGAPUDI, GUNTUR, ANDHRA PRADESH

¶14

THE DIRECTOR GENERAL OF POLICE, , STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH, BUCKINGHAMPETA, VIJAYAWADA, ANDHRA PRADESH - 520002.

¶15

THE SUPERINTENDENT OF POLICE, , VISAKHAPATNAM DISTRICT, VISAKHAPATNAM, ANDHRA PRADESH.

¶16

THE STATION HOUSE OFFICER, RAMBILLI POLICE STATION VISAKHAPATNAM DISTRICT ANDHRA PRADESH.

¶17

SRI PUSPARAJU REDDY, SUB INSPECTOR OF POLICE RAMBILLI POLICE STATION VISAKHAPATNAM DISTRICT ANDHRA PRADESH.

¶18

L SRINIVASA RAO, S/O.NOT KNOWN TO THE PETITIONER M/S. SRINIVASA ENTERPRISES SEZ COLONY, GARUJAPELEM VILLAGE, ATCHUTAPURAM MDL, VISAKHA DIST., ANDHRA PRADESH 531011

¶19

...RESPONDENT(S):

¶20

¶21

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 or Order or direction preferably one in the nature of Writ of Mandamus declaring that the action of the respondents, more particularly 4th and 5th respondents in calling the petitioner officers and employees to the Office of 4th respondent detaining and to threaten to settle the matter with 6th respondent without taking any action on the complaint lodged by the petitioner and provide security for smooth completion of project for M/s. Indian Oil Corporation Limited as Atchutapuram, Visakhapatnam District, Andhra Pradesh as illegal, arbitrary, abuse of power of police and also violation of fundamental rights guaranteed under Constitution, against Law as well as principles of natural justice and consequentially direct the respondents not to harass the petitioner and its employees by providing the security for smooth completion of project for M/s. Indian Oil Corporation Limited as Atchutapuram, Visakhapatnam District, Andhra Pradesh

¶22

Counsel for the Petitioner:

¶23

1.K B RAMANNA DORA

¶24

Counsel for the Respondent(S):

¶25

1.GP FOR HOME

¶26

2.G RAMA GOPAL

¶27

The Court made the following:

¶28

¶29

HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE K. SREENIVASA REDDY

¶30

WRIT PETITION No.23346 of 2021

¶31

ORDER:

¶32

This Writ Petition has been filed seeking to declare the action of respondents in calling the petitioner’s officers and employees to the office of the 4^th respondent, detaining them and threatening them to settle the matter with 6^th respondent without taking any action on the complaint lodged by the petitioner, as illegal and arbitrary and consequently direct the respondents not to harass the petitioner and its employees and to provide security for smooth completion of project.

¶33

Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that cause in the present Writ Petition does not survive and the matter has become infructuous.

¶34

Recording the said submission, the Writ Petition is dismissed as infructuous. No order as to costs.

¶35

As a sequel thereto, the miscellaneous applications, if any, pending in this Writ Petition shall stand closed.

¶36

_________________________ K. SREENIVASA REDDY, J

Date: 15.04.2026

Vns

HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE K. SREENIVASA REDDY

¶42

WRIT PETITION No.23346 of 2021

¶43

Date: 15.04.2026

¶44

Vns

M/s.Prashanth Projects Limited v. The State of Andhra Pradesh

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

M/s.Prashanth Projects Limited v. The State of Andhra Pradesh

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Sree Vinayaka Medical Agencies Vs Budithi Rajsekhar IAS

Mallela Raja Ram Reddy, Vs Mallela Muralidhar

K.V. Lokanadh Vs The State of Andhra Pradesh

Avuthu Sambasiva Reddy Vs The State of Andhra Pradesh

M/s. Vuma Resorts India Limited, Vs The State of Andhra Pradesh

Paralaamaralingeswara Rao Vs the State of Andhra Pradesh