Andhra Pradesh High Court
WP/26292/2010 of Vesapogu Chinna Mathaiah Vs M/s. Bharat Petroleum Corporation Ltd., on 16 November 2025
HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) [3459] MONDAY, THE SEVENTEENTH DAY OF NOVEMBER TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SMT JUSTICE SUMATHI JAGADAM WRIT PETITION NO: 26292/2010 Between: 1. VESAPOGU CHINNA MATHAIAH, S/O. DANAIAH UN EMPLOYEE R/O.
APHC010138342010
IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA
PRADESH
AT AMARAVATI
(Special Original Jurisdiction)
MONDAY,THE SEVENTEENTH DAY OF NOVEMBER
TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE SMT JUSTICE SUMATHI JAGADAM
WRIT PETITION NO: 26292/2010
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. VESAPOGU CHINNA MATHAIAH, S/O. DANAIAH UN EMPLOYEE R/O. 2-24, CHRISTIANPALEM PEDDA ARAVEEDU VILLAGE AND MANDAL, PRAKASAM DISTRICT
...PETITIONER AND
1. M/S BHARAT PETROLEUM CORPORATION LTD, REP. BY ITS TERRITORY MANAGER, L.P.G. BOTTLING PLNAT & TERRITORY OFFICE N.H. 7, 217/6, KH STONE PB NO.: 10, B. CAMP, NEAR LAKSHMIPURAM VILLAGE,
2. THE DISTRICT COLLECTOR, PRAKASAM DISTRICT, AT ONGOLE
3. THE TAHASILDAR, PEDDA ARAVEEDU MANDAL, PRAKASAM DISTRICT
4. KINNERA PRABHAKAR RAO, S/O. CHINNA VENKATAIAH R/O. 3-29A, SANIKAVARAM VILLAGE, PEDDA ARAVEEDU MANDAL, PRAKASAM 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 todirection more particularly one in the nature of writ of Mandamus declaring the action of respondents in not cancelling the LPG distributorship of the 4th respondent at Pedda Araveedu Village, Pedda Araveedu Mandal, Prakasam District as illegal, arbitrary and consequently direct the respondents 1 to 3 to take necessary steps for cancellation of LPG distributorship of 4th respondent, and pass IA NO: 1 OF 2010(WPMP 33572 OF 2010 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 to stay the operationof the appointment of 4th respondent for distributorship of Pedda Araveedu Village, Pedda Araveedu Mandal, Prakasam District, pending disposal of the above Writ petition and pass Counsel for the Petitioner:
1. TENE PANDU RANGA RAO Counsel for the Respondent(S):
1. G ELISHA
2. GP FOR REVENUE
3. O MANOHAR REDDY(SC FOR APTRANSCO)
4. V V SATISH
The Court made the following ORDER:
Since there was no representation on behalf of the learned counsel for the petitioner on 11.08.2025, the matter was listed on 18.08.2025 under the caption ‘for dismissal’. Thereafter, the matter was again listed on 10.09.2025. Even on that day there was no representation for the petitioner. Hence, the matter was listed today under the same caption.
Today when the matter is called, there is no representation for the petitioner. It appears that the learned counsel for the petitioner is not interested to prosecute the case.
Therefore, the Writ Petition is dismissed for non-prosecution. There shall be no order as to costs.
As a sequel, miscellaneous applications pending, if any, shall stand closed.
__________________________________ JUSTICE SUMATHI JAGADAM Dated: 17.11.2025 ANS
THE HONOURABLE SMT JUSTICE SUMATHI JAGADAM
WRIT PETITION NO: 26292/2010
Dated: 17.11.2025 ANS