Andhra Pradesh High Court
WP/41431/2017 of Devathi Karthik Vs Hindustan Petroleum Corporation Ltd., on 11 November 2025
HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH :: AMARAVATI (SPECIAL ORIGINAL JURISDICTION) WEDNESDAY, THE TWELFTH DAY OF NOVEMBER TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE 3459 PRESENT THE HON'BLE SMT. JUSTICE SUMATHI JAGADAM WRIT PETITION No.41431 OF 2017 Between: Devathi Karthik --- Petitioner and Hindustan Petroleum
APHC010943602017
IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH :: AMARAVATI
(SPECIAL ORIGINAL JURISDICTION)
WEDNESDAY, THE TWELFTH DAY OF NOVEMBER
TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE
PRESENT
THE HON'BLE SMT. JUSTICE SUMATHI JAGADAM
WRIT PETITION No.41431 OF 2017
Between:
Devathi Karthik
---
Petitioner
and
Hindustan Petroleum Corporation
Limited, Represented by its Regional
Manager, Nellore
---
Respondent
Counsel for the Petitioner
: Sri P.V.A. Padmanabham
Counsel for the Respondent
: Sri Penumaka Venkata Rao
The Court made the following:
JS,J
WP No.41431/2017
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.
ORDER:
The present Writ Petition, under Article 226 of Constitution of India, is filed by the petitioner seeking the following relief:
“…..to issue to writ or direction in the nature of mandamus declaring the show-cause notice Lr.no.NRRO/RET/MNS/TC dated 20.11.2017 issued by the Respondent as arbitrary, illegal and violative of Art.19 & 21 of the Constitution of India, consequently quash the show-cause notice and pass such other…”
2. On the complaint received by the Hindustan Petroleum Corporation Limited (HPCL) that, during the selection of the petitioner as the subject retail outlet dealer, he got engaged with M/s. Tech Mahindra, the show-cause notice, dated 20.11.2017, was issued to the petitioner. Challenging the said show-cause notice, the petitioner filed this Writ Petition. On filing of this Writ Petition, this Court seems to have orally directed the petitioner to reply to the impugned show-cause notice. In the review meeting conducted by the respondent on 19.01.2023, it revealed that the petitioner has resigned to his job from M/s. Tech Mahindra and is operating the retail outlet.
3. Further, the respondent had not acted upon the said show- cause notice issued to the petitioner.
JS,J WP No.41431/2017
4. Since the petitioner is continuing as retail outlet dealer, no further orders are required to be passed in this Writ Petition, the Writ Petition stands closed. No order as to costs.
As a sequel, miscellaneous applications pending, if any, shall stand closed.
__________________________ JUSTICE SUMATHI JAGADAM Date:12.11.2025 DSH