Andhra Pradesh High Court
WA/503/2026 of MAA ARTS Vs THE STATE OF AP on 14 June 2026
HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI WRIT APPEAL NO: 503 of 2026 Bench Sr.No:-53 [3579] Maa Arts ...Appellant Vs. The State Of AP and Others ...Respondent(s) ********** Advocate for Appellant: Mr. K. Chidambaram, Senior Counsel, appearing vice Mr. Narasimha Rao Gudiseva Advocate(s) for
Citations and Judicial Treatment
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…
This judgment in the centre: on the left the decisions it cites, on the right the decisions citing it. Colour is the treatment; choose a decision to open it.
APHC010222772026
IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI
WRIT APPEAL NO: 503 of 2026 Bench Sr.No:-53
Maa Arts ...Appellant Vs. The State Of AP and Others ...Respondent(s) ********** Advocate for Appellant: Mr. K. Chidambaram, Senior Counsel, appearing vice Mr. Narasimha Rao Gudiseva Advocate(s) for Respondent(s): GP for Municipal Admn & Urban Dev – R1 Mr. S.V.S.S. Sivaram, SC For VMC – R2 to R4
CORAM : THE CHIEF JUSTICE LISA GILL SRI JUSTICE NINALA JAYASURYA DATE : 15th June 2026 LISA GILL, CJ: Present appellant filed W.P. No.10964 of 2026 challenging order dated 17.04.2026, issued by 3rd respondent directing petitioner firm to remove all LED display devices within 24 hours of receipt of the said order dated 17.04.2026, which is stated to have been received on 21.04.2026.
2. Learned writ Court on 22.04.2026 passed following order: “Heard Sri Narasimha Rao Gudiseva, Ld. Counsel for the Writ Petitioner and Sri S.V.S.S. Sivaram, Ld. Standing Counsel for the Respondent Nos. 2 to 4.
2. This Court has perused the impugned Proceeding bearing Rc.G1- 119463/2024, dated 17.04.2026 (Ex.P.1). Having considered the contents of the impugned Proceedings, this Court is not inclined to grant any interim relief to the Writ Petitioner.
3. Let Counter-Affidavit be filed within four weeks. Two weeks thereafter, for filing Rejoinder, if any.
4. List on 29.06.2026.
5. However, having regard to the facts, the Writ Petitioner is granted one week time from the date of uploading of this Order on the website of this Court for remitting the balance amount as demanded in Para-1 of Page-20 of Paper Book (Ex.P.1), failing which, the Respondent Authorities are at liberty to initiate suitable action in accordance with law.
6. This apart, the Writ Petitioner is also granted additional three days time from the date of uploading of this Order on the website of this Court to remove the boards in the event that the Order of this Court is not complied with, failing which, the Respondents Authorities are directed to initiate proceedings in accordance with law.
7. Ld. Standing Counsel for the Respondent Nos. 2 to 4 is directed to convey the gist of this Order to the respective Authorities forthwith, for effective compliance. ”
3. Present writ appeal has been filed with grievance that interim relief ought to have been granted to appellant/writ petitioner in the given facts and circumstances of the case. It is submitted that LED display devices were installed with proper permissions. Respondent Corporation is demanding permission/license fee for the entire financial year of 2025-26 though requisite permissions were granted in November, 2025 and February, 2026 only.
4. At this stage, learned counsel for appellant points out that vide order dated 23.04.2026, passed in this appeal, it was directed that 50% of amount demanded vide impugned notice be deposited by appellant within a period of two weeks and that a structural stability certificate be also submitted as contemplated under the Rules in the said period. It was directed that impugned proceedings would remain stayed till next date of hearing.
5. It is further pointed out by learned counsel for appellant that in compliance of said order as well as order dated 07.05.2026, 50% of demanded amount has been deposited along with structural stability certificate. This is so affirmed and confirmed by learned counsel for respondent Nos.2 to 4.
6. Learned counsel for appellant submits that W.P. No. 10964 of 2026, as per website, is listed for hearing on 29.06.2026. It is undertaken that arguments shall be addressed on said date of hearing and no adjournment shall be sought, however, interim relief as granted be continued till decision of said writ petition.
7. Learned counsel for respondents has not raised any serious objection except to say that writ petition should be disposed of expeditiously and that no adjournment should be sought by learned counsel for petitioner.
8. Keeping in view the facts and circumstances noted above, impugned proceedings, it is directed, shall remain stayed till decision of Writ Petition No.10964 of 2026. It is clarified that in case any adjournment is sought on behalf of petitioner, this interim order shall automatically stand vacated. There is no expression of opinion on merits of the matter. The writ appeal is, accordingly, disposed of. No costs.
Pending miscellaneous applications, if any, shall stand closed.
LISA GILL, CJ
NINALA JAYASURYA, J
akn
HON’BLE MRS.JUSTICE LISA GILL, CHIEF JUSTICE & HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE NINALA JAYASURYA
Writ Appeal No: 503 of 2026 DATE : 15.06.2026
AKN