Andhra Pradesh High Court
WP/35287/2012 of M/s Vedik (spat (P) Limited, Vs rep. by its Managing Director, on 8 March 2026
HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) [3209] MONDAY, THE NINTH DAY OF MARCH TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY SIX PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE NINALA JAYASURYA WRIT PETITION NO: 35287/2012 Between: 1. M/S VEDIK (SPAT (P) LIMITED,, PLOT NO. 30, APIIC GOULIPURAM
APHC010267492012
IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH
AT AMARAVATI
(Special Original Jurisdiction)
MONDAY, THE NINTH DAY OF MARCH
TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY SIX
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE NINALA JAYASURYA
WRIT PETITION NO: 35287/2012
Between:
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.
1. M/S VEDIK (SPAT (P) LIMITED,, PLOT NO. 30, APIIC GOULIPURAM INDUSTRIAL PARK, HINDUPUR MANDAL, ANANTHAPUR DISTRICT REP. BY ITS CHIEF FINANCE OFFICER, K.V. SRINATH.
...PETITIONER AND
1. REP BY ITS MANAGING DIRECTOR, THE CENTRAL POWER DISTRIBUTION COMPANY OF A.P. LIMITED, MINT COMPOUND, HYDERABAD.
2. THE SUPERINTENDING ENGINEER, OPERATION CIRCLE, CENTRAL POWER DISTRIBUTION COMPANY OF A.P. LIMITED, ANANTHAPUR, ANANTHAPUR DISTRICT.
3. THE SENIOR ACCOUNTS OFFICER, OPERATION CIRCLE, CENTRAL POWER DISTRIBUTION COMPANY OF A.P. LIMITED,' ANANTHAPUR, ANANTHAPUR DISTRICT.
...RESPONDENT(S): Counsel for the Petitioner:
1. KIRAN TIRUMALASETTI Counsel for the Respondent(S):
1. Venkata Rama Rao Kota SC FOR APSPDCL
2. V R REDDY KOVVURI(SC FOR APSPDCL)
3. O MANOHER REDDY
NJS,J W.P No.35287 of 2012
The Court made the following Order:
Mr. V Hemanth Kumar, learned counsel representing the learned counsel for the petitioner, states that the cause in the writ petition does not survive and the matter has become infructuous.
2. In view of the same, the Writ Petition is dismissed as infructuous. Interim orders, if any, granted on the earlier occasion shall stand vacated. No costs. Miscellaneous petitions pending, if any, shall stand closed. __________________________ JUSTICE NINALA JAYASURYA Date:09.03.2026 Ksj