This Writ Appeal, filed against an order that allowed a lower writ petition involving licensees of liquor establishments, was dismissed as infructuous because counsel for the respondents submitted that the underlying matter had become sub judice or non-existent, leaving nothing to contest in the appeal.
The writ appeal was dismissed as infructuous.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD
THURSDAY, THE FOURTH DAY OF JUNE TWO THOUSAND AND NINE
PRESENT
THE HON'BLE SMT. JUSTICE T.MEENA KUMARI and THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE SANJAY KUMAR
WRIT APPEAL NO : 418 of 2002
(Writ Appeal under Clause 15 of the Letters Patent against the Order dated 04-2-2002 in WP NO : 21518 OF 2001 on the file of the High Court.)
Between: Sankuru Mark S/o.Gnananandam, Hindu R/o.Pottur Village, Thadepalli Mandal, Guntur District. Licensee of Geetanjali Wines, Mangalagiri, Guntur District.
APPELLANT
AND
.....RESPONDENTS
Counsel for the Appellant: MR.M.CHANDRASEKHAR REDDY
Counsel for the Respondent No.1: MR.M.RAVINDRANATH REDDY
Counsel for the Respondent Nos.2 to 4: GP for Prohibition &
Excise
The Division Bench of this Court made the following : Judgment follows 2nd page
THE HON'BLE SMT. JUSTICE T.MEENA KUMARI and THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE SANJAY KUMAR
WRIT APPEAL NO : 418 of 2002
J U D G M E N T : (Per the Hon’ble Smt. Justice T. Meena Kumari)
The writ appeal is filed against common order dated 04-2-2002 passed in WP.No. 21518 of 2001 by the learned single Judge, whereby the learned single Judge allowed the writ petition and set aside the impugned order.
2. When the matter came up today, the learned counsel Sri M. Ravindranath Reddy submitted that the matter has become infructuous and nothing survives in the writ appeal.
3. Recording the above submission, the writ appeal is dismissed as infructuous.
_________________________ JUSTICE T.MEENA
_____________________ JUSTICE SANJAY KUMAR
04-6-2009 I s L
Sankuru Mark
A. Ratna Kumari
Government of A.P. Revenue (Excise-III) Department
Commissioner of Prohibition & Excise
Prohibition and Excise Superintendent
T. Meena Kumari
Sanjay Kumar
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
