Andhra Pradesh High Court

WP/7012/2026 of Singamreddy Nageswar Reddy Vs The State of Andhra Pradesh, on 22 June 2026

Cites 0, Cited by 0

Citation:……………………… Date of reserved for orders : Date of pronouncement : 23.06.2026 Date of uploading : APHC010130652026 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) [3332] TUESDAY, THE TWENTY THIRD

Neutral Citation:………………………

Date of reserved for orders :

Date of pronouncement : 23.06.2026

Date of uploading :

APHC010130652026

IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH

AT AMARAVATI

(Special Original Jurisdiction)

TUESDAY,THE TWENTY THIRD DAY OF JUNE

TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY SIX

PRESENT

THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE RAVI CHEEMALAPATI

WRIT PETITION NO: 7012/2026

Between:

1. SINGAMREDDY NAGESWAR REDDY, S/O.S JAYARAMI REDDY, AGED ABOUT 41 YEARS, LICENSEE OF M/S.CHOWDESWARI

WINES(L.NO.61/2024-26), R/O.D.NO.2/210, DEVAGUDI VILLAGE, JAMMALAMADUGU, YSR KADAPA DISTRICT -516434.

2. KUPPANNAGARI VEERA MOHAN REDDY, S/O.K.V.RAMI REDDY, AGED ABOUT 40 YEARS, LICENSEE OF M/S.VEERABHADRA

WINES

(L.NO.62/2024-26),

R/O.D.NO.2/99/4,

DEVAGUDI,

JAMMALAMADUGU, YSR KADAPA DISTRICT - 516434.

...PETITIONER(S)

AND

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

SECRETARY,

PROHIBITION

AND

EXCISE

DEPARTMENT,

SECRETARIAT BUILDINGS, VELAGAPUDI, AMARAVATHI GUNTUR

DISTRICT-522238.

2. THE DIRECTOR/COMMISSIONER, PROHIBITION AND EXCISE

DEPARTMENT, MANGALAGIRI, GUNTUR DISTRICT-522503.

3. THE

DEPUTY

COMMISSIONER,

PROHIBITION

AND

EXCISE

DEPARTMENT, KADAPA-516001.

4. THE DISTRICT PROHIBITION AND EXCISE OFFICER, KADAPA-

516001.

5. JAMMALAMADUGU MUNICIPALITY, REP. BY ITS COMMISSIONER, JAMMALAMADUGU, YSR KADAPA DISTRICT-516434.

...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 pleased to issue a Writ of Mandamus or any other appropriate writ, order or direction, declaring the action of the respondents in fixing the Retail Excise Tax (RET) at Rs 65,00,000/- per annum in respect of the petitioners licensed shops I.e., 1St petitioner L.No.61/2024-26 , 2nd petitioner

L.Nos.62/2024-26, both are established and running at present in Jammalamadugu Municipality (earlier Jammalamadugu Nagar Panchayat), YSR Kadapa District, by erroneously treating the population of - Jammalamadugu as above 50,000, which is illegal, arbitrary, violative of Articles 14 and 19(1)(g) of the Constitution of India and contrary to Rule 15(1)

read with Rule 2(t) of The Andhra Pradesh Excise (Grant of Licence of Selling by Shop and Conditions of Licence) Rules,. 2024, and also contrary to the law laid down by this Honble Court in W.P.No.32237 of 2025 dated 12.12.2025, and consequently direct the respondents to refix/revise and collect the Retail Excise Tax payable by the petitioner's licensed shops I.e., 1st petitioner

L.No.61/2024-26, 2nd petitioner L.Nos.62/2024-26, both are established and running at present in Jammalamadugu Municipality (earlier Jammalamadugu Nagar Panchayat), YSR Kadapa District, by treating the population of Jammalamadugu Municipality (earlier Jammalamadugu Nagar Panchayat) as below 50,000 as per the official Census 2011 and levy the applicable RET of Rs 55,00,000/- per annum, 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 direct the respondents to collect the Retail Excise Tax (RET) payable by the petitioner's licensed shops I.e., 1st petitioner

L.No.61/2024-26, 2"d petitioner LNos.62/2024-26, both are established and running at present in Jammalamadugu Municipality (earlier Jammalamadugu Nagar Panchayat), YSR Kadapa District, at ₹55,00,000/- per annum, instead of ₹65,00,000/- per annum, without insisting upon payment of the higher amount, and pass such Counsel for the Petitioner(S):

1. RAVULA NAGARJUNA

Counsel for the Respondent(S):

1. GP FOR PROHIBITION EXCISE

The Court made the following:

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 Ravula Nagarjuna, learned counsel for the petitioners and Sri Nagaraju Pullagura, learned Government Pleader for Prohibition and Excise appearing for the respondents, collectively submitted that the cause in the writ petition does not survive and has become infructuous.

Recording the said submission, the Writ Petition is dismissed as infructuous. There shall be no order as to costs.

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

JUSTICE RAVI CHEEMALAPATI

Date: 23.06.2026. JLV

Whether the order is: Speaking

Reasoned

Reportable

Non-reportable

THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE RAVI CHEEMALAPATI

WRIT PETITION NO: 7012/2026

Date: 23.06.2026 JLV

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