Kvvs Subrahmanyam, v. The State of Andhra Pradesh

Andhra Pradesh HC22 Feb 2026WP/27268/2014

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Mining/quarry lease writ petition (Article 226, mandamus) closed without adjudication on 23.02.2026 before Maheswara Rao Kuncheam, J.; show cause notice No.131/Q/2014 dated 25.08.2014 reported no longer in force and quarry lease application process completed per written instructions of the 3rd respondent (District Collector, East Godavari) placed on record in compliance with Court orders dated 16.02.2026; petitioner KVVS Subrahmanyam (Biccavole, East Godavari District); respondents: State of A.P. (Director of Mines and Geology), Asst Director of Mines and Geology, District Collector, Tahsildar; IA under Section 151 CPC sought suspension of the notice; no cases cited; no monetary quantum.

What did the court decide?

None; the writ petition was closed with no order as to costs. ¶¶37

Kvvs Subrahmanyam, Vs The State of Andhra… — Writ and Judicial Review | Andhra Pradesh HC (2026)

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

None; the writ petition was closed with no order as to costs.

¶¶37

Issue for consideration

Whether the action of the 2nd respondent in issuing Notice No.131/Q/2014 dt. 25.08.2014 was illegal, arbitrary and in violation of Principles of Natural Justice, and whether the respondents should grant the lease basing on the petitioner's lease application dt. 08.01.2014 by setting aside the notice dated 25-08-2014.

¶¶30

Court's answer

Recording the submission of the learned counsel for the petitioner that no further orders were required (following the 3rd respondent's written instructions that the show cause notice vide No.131/Q/2014 dated 25.08.2014 is no longer in force and the quarry lease application process has been completed), the writ petition was closed.

¶¶37

Ratio / Principle

No order as to costs was made, and miscellaneous petitions pending, if any, were directed to stand closed.

¶¶38

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Writ Petition No. 27268 of 2014 (High Court of Andhra Pradesh at Amaravati, Maheswara Rao Kuncheam, J., 23.02.2026): KVVS Subrahmanyam had sought a writ of mandamus declaring the 2nd respondent's action in issuing Notice No.131/Q/2014 dt. 25.08.2014 illegal, arbitrary and violative of Principles of Natural Justice, and directing grant of the lease on his lease application dt. 08.01.2014 by setting aside the notice dated 25-08-2014. At hearing, the Assistant Government Pleader for Mines and Geology reported that, in compliance with this Court's orders dated 16.02.2026, written instructions of the 3rd respondent were placed on record, making clear that the show cause notice vide No.131/Q/2014 dated 25.08.2014 is no longer in force and the quarry lease application process has been completed. Counsel for the petitioner thereupon submitted that no further orders were required; the Court recorded the submission and closed the writ petition, made no order as to costs, and directed pending miscellaneous petitions, if any, to stand closed. No merits adjudication was made and no precedent was cited.

¶1

¶2

APHC010312902014

¶3

IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI

¶4

(Special Original Jurisdiction)

¶5

MONDAY, THE TWENTY THIRD DAY OF FEBRUARY TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY SIX

¶6

PRESENT

¶7

THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE MAHESWARA RAO KUNCHEAM

¶8

WRIT PETITION NO: 27268 OF 2014

¶9

Between:

¶10

KVVS Subrahmanyam, S/o Sivayya, D.No.11-8/2, Andhra Bank Street, Biccavole Village & Mandal, East Godavari District.

¶11

...Petitioner

¶12

AND

¶13

The State of Andhra Pradesh, rep, by the Director of Mines and Geology, Hyderabad.

¶14

The Asst Director of Mines and Geology, Gandhipuram, Rajahmundry.

¶15

The District Collector, East Godavari District.

¶16

The Tahsildar, Biccavole, East Godavari District.

¶17

...Respondents

¶18

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 writ, order or direction, more particularly one in the nature of writ of mandamus declaring the action of the 2nd respondent in issuing the Notice No.131/Q/2014 dt. 25.08.2014 as illegal, arbitrary and violation of Principles of Natural Justice and consequently direct the respondents to grant the lease basing on the petitioner's lease

¶19

¶20

application dt.08.01.2014 by setting aside the notice dated 25-08-2014 and pass

¶21

IA NO: 1 OF 2014(WPMP 34139 OF 2014

¶22

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 suspend the operation of Notice No.131/Q/2014 dated 25.08.2014, and direct the respondents to dispose of the mining lease application of the petitioner dated 08.01.2014 pending disposal of the writ petition and pass

¶23

Counsel for the Petitioner: PILLIX LAW FIRM

¶24

Counsel for the Respondents: GP FOR MINES AND GEOLOGY (AP) Counsel for the Respondents: GP FOR REVENUE (AP)

¶25

The Court made the following order:

¶26

¶27

HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE MAHESWARA RAO KUNCHEAM WRIT PETITION No.27268 OF 2014

¶28

ORDER:

¶29

The instant writ petition has been filed by the petitioner under Article 226 of Constitution of India seeking the following main prayer:

¶30

“to issue writ, order or direction, more particularly one in the nature of writ of mandamus declaring the action of the 2nd respondent in issuing the Notice No.131/Q/2014 dt. 25.08.2014 as illegal, arbitrary and violation of Principles of Natural Justice and consequently direct the respondents to grant the lease basing on the petitioner's lease application dt.08.01.2014 by setting aside the notice dated 25-08-2014 and pass …..”

¶31

2. When the matter is taken up for hearing, learned Assistant

¶32

Government Pleader for Mines and Geology submits that in compliance of the orders of this Court dated 16.02.2026, they received written instructions from the 3^rd respondent and the same was placed on record.

¶33

As per the written instructions, it is made clear that the show cause notice vide No.131/Q/2014, dated 25.08.2014, is no longer in

¶34

¶35

force, and the quarry lease application process has also been completed.

¶36

After perusing the written instructions of the 3^rd respondent, the learned counsel for the petitioner, submits that no further orders are required to be passed in the instant writ petition.

¶37