Andhra Pradesh High Court

WP/18684/2025 of PENTA VENKATA SAI KOUSHIK Vs The State of Andhra Pradesh, on 22 June 2026

Cites 0, Cited by 0

reserved for orders Date of pronouncement Date of uploading APHC010366142025 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH TUESDAY, THE TWENTY THIRD DAY OF JUNE TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY SIX THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE RAVI CHEEMALAPATI WRIT PETITION NO: 18684/2025 Between: 1. PENTA VENKATA SAI KOUSHIK, S/O.

Date of reserved for orde

Date of pronouncement

Date of uploading

APHC010366142025

IN TH

TUESDAY

TWO

THE HONOURA

WR

Between:

1. PENTA VENKATA

YEARS, R/O. D

STREET,

RAJAMAHENDRA

DISTRICT.

2. NALLAMOLU NA

YEARS, R/O. D.N

ROAD, RAJAHMU

3. PINNAMAREDDY

45 YEARS, R/O

VINAYAKA TEMP

DISTRICT.

4. SANABOINA SAT

YEARS, R/O.

SIVALAYAM,

RAJAMAHENDRA

Neutral Citat

ers

: ----

: 23.06.2026

: 25.06.2026

E HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRAD

AT AMARAVATI

(Special Original Jurisdiction)

Y,THE TWENTY THIRD DAY OF JUN

O THOUSAND AND TWENTY SIX

PRESENT

ABLE SRI JUSTICE RAVI CHEEMAL

RIT PETITION NO: 18684/2025

A SAI KOUSHIK, S/O. P. TRINAD

D.NO.78-13-6, BRUNDAVANAM

NEAR

SWAMY

VIDYALAYA

AVARAM, SYAMALA NAGAR, EAS

ARENDRA,, S/O. RAMANJANEYULU

NO.54-7-10, SHEELA NAGAR, AV

UNDRY, EAST GODAVARI DISTRICT

SUBRAMANYAM,, S/O. P. VENKAT

O. D.NO.3-151, RAYUDUPAKALA R

PLE, RAJAMAHENDRAVARAM, EAS

TYANARAYANA,, S/O. SUBBARA

D.NO.64-35-2/1, SUBBARAO NAG

QUARY

MARKET

AVARAM, EAST GODAVARI DISTRIC

RC,J

tion:__________

DESH

NE

LAPATI

H, AGED 28

RESTAURANT

HOSPITAL,

ST GODAVARI

U AGED 38

V APPA RAO

T.

TA RAO, AGED

ROAD, NEAR

ST GODAVARI

O, AGED 68

GAR, NEAR

CENTRE,

CT.

RC,J

5. KOTHAPALLI

BALA

SUBRAHMANYAM,,

S/O.

(LATE)

K.

SATYANARAYANA, AGED 55 YEARS, R/O. D.NO.80-4-10, KANCHANA HEIGHTS, SAI NAGAR, RAJAHMUNDRY, EAST

GODAVARI DISTRICT.

6. AKULA SYAM BABU,, S/O. BHASKARA RAO AGED 47 YEARS, R/O.

D.NO.79-18-1/1, OMKAR STREET, NAVEEN TRAVELS, SYAMALA

NAGAR, RAJAHMUNDRY, EAST GODAVARI DISTRICT.

7. GANDHAM DHUSYANTHA KUMAR,, S/O. SRINIVASA RAO, AGED

30 YEARS, R/O. D.NO.60-6-10/1, P AND T COLONY, RAJAHMUNDRY, EAST GODAVARI DISTRICT.

8. VAKALAPUDI BALA NARESH,, S/O. (LATE) TATARAO, AGED 37

YEARS,

R/O.

D.NO.71-5-32,

BATHINA

NAGAR,

RAJAHMAHENDRAVARAM, EAST GODAVARI DISTRICT.

9. POTHULA VENKATA GANESH KUMAR,, S/O. SUBBARAO, AGED

YEARS,

R/O.

D.NO.35-6-14,

POTULA

VARI

STREET,

MANGALAVARAPUPETA, RAJAHMUNDRY, EAST GODAVARI

DISTRICT.

10. ADABALA VEERAKRISHNA,, S/O. NAGESWARA RAO AGED 37

YEARS, R/O. D.NO.2-60, NEAR PANCHAYATI, PEDAPUDI, ATCHUTAPURATRAYAM, EAST GODAVARI DISTRICT.

11. MEDDAPATI RAJA RAMESH REDDY,, S/O. VEERA RAGHAVA

REDDY, AGED 50 YEARS, R/O. D.NO.57-2-2/1, MALLIKHARJUNA

NAGAR, KORUKONDA ROAD, OPP CTRI BACKSIDE GATE, RAJAHMUNDRY, EAST GODAVARI DISTRICT.

12. GUTTULA SUBBA LAKSHMI,, W/O. SESHAGIRI RAO, AGED 52

YEARS, R/O. D.NO. 10-205, SUBRAHMANYAM SWAMI TEMPLE

STREET, VEMAGIRI VILLAGE, KADIYAM MANDAL, EAST

GODAVARI DISTRICT

...PETITIONER(S)

AND

1. THE STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH, REP. BY ITS PRINCIPAL

SECRETARY, PROHIBITION AND EXCISE DEPARTMENT, A.P.

SECRETARIAT BUILDINGS, VELAGAPUDI, AMARAVATHI, GUNTUR

RC,J

DISTRICT.

2. THE

COMMISSIONER

AND

DIRECTOR,

PROHIBITION

AND

EXCISE,

EXCISE

COMPLEX,

R.S.NO.88-2B,

SAI

VIHAR

APARTMENTS, POULTRY FARM ROAD PRASADAMPADU (V), VIJAYAWADA-521108.

3. THE DISTRICT PROHIBITION AND EXCISE OFFICER, LICENSING

AUTHORITY,

RAJAMAHENDRAVARAM,

EAST

GODAVARI

DISTRICT, ANDHRA PRADESH.

4. THE RAJAMAHENDRAVARAM MUNICIPAL CORPORATION, REP.

BY

ITS

COMMISSIONER,

RAJAMAHENDRAVARAM,

EAST

GODAVARI DISTRICT.

...RESPONDENT(S):

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 tomay be pleased to issue a writ, order or direction more particularly one in the nature of a writ of Mandamus by declaring the action of the Respondents 1 to 3 in fixing the Retail Excise Tax (RET) at Rs.85,00,000/- for the year 2024-2025 and Rs.93,50,000/- for the year 2025-2026 in respect of the Shops in Gazette SI.Nos.EG-23, EG-4, EG-10, EG-15, EG- 25, EG-28, EG-13, EG-09, EG-24, EG-11, EG-03 and EG-02 in the Notification published by the way of Errata in Gazete No.75

dated

01-10-2024

in

Rajamahendravaram Urban Area by taking into consideration of the population of the Rajamahendravaram Municipal Corporation as above 5

lakhs by including the villages to be merged in the Rajamahendravaram Municipal Corporation as highly arbitrary, illegal, colorable exercise of power and contrary to law and consequently direct the Respondents 1 to 3 to fix the Retail Excise Tax by taking into consideration of the actual population of Rajamahendravaram as per 2011 census i.e., 3,41,831 into consideration and adjust the Retail Excise Tax paid in respect of our respective Shops by treating the Retail Excise Tax for the year 2024-2025 as Rs.65,00,000/- and Rs.71,50,000/- for the year 2025-2026 as per 2011 population census and to pass such IA NO: 1 OF 2025

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 may be pleased to direct the respondents 1 to 3 to re-fix the Retail Excise RC,J

Tax in respect of Shop Nos. EG-23, EG-4, EG-10, EG-15, EG-25, EG-28, EG-13, EG-09, EG-24, EG-11, EG-03 and EG-02 by taking into consideration of population of Rajamahendravaram as less than 5 lakhs pending disposal of the above writ petition and pass such IA NO: 1 OF 2026

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 may be pleased to grant leave to the Respondents to file Counter Affidavit and to pass Counsel for the Petitioner(S):

1.GINJUPALLI SUBBA RAO

Counsel for the Respondent(S):

1.GP FOR PROHIBITION

The Court made the following:

RC,J

Citations and Judicial Treatment

No citing decisions in the index yet

Cited by

0

Decisions in the index citing it

Cites

0

Decisions referred to

In this index

0

Of the decisions it cites

Overruled / Questioned

0

No negative treatment found

Loading the citing and cited decisions…

ORDER

Sri Ramesh Babu T., learned counsel, representing Sri Ginjupalli Subba Rao, learned counsel for the petitioners, submitted that cause this writ petition no longer survives and the writ petition has become infructuous.

2. In view the above submission, this Writ Petition is dismissed as infructuous. There shall be no order as to costs.

Pending miscellaneous petitions, if any, shall stand closed. ___________________________ JUSTICE RAVI CHEEMALAPATI RR 23rd June, 2026. RR Whether the order is Speaking

Reasoned

Reportable

Non-reportable

You have used today's free searches. Sign in, for free, to keep searching without a limit.

Compass reads the judgments for you and finds the paragraphs for and against your question. Sign in to use it.

My Vault follows judgments for you and records every later decision that cites them. Sign in to keep one.

Sign in to download the court's PDF. The full text stays free to read here.

Sign in, for free, to download the court copy. Reading the full text here stays open to everyone.

Search and read Indian judgments without limits, save them to My Vault and find the relevant paragraphs with Compass.

Open the sign-in page instead