Andhra Pradesh High Court
WP/13471/2016 of Sayeed Ahmed Impex, Vs The Union of India, on 5 October 2025
HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) [3459] MONDAY, THE SIXTH DAY OF OCTOBER TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SMT JUSTICE SUMATHI JAGADAM WRIT PETITION NO: 13471/2016 Between: 1. SAYEED AHMED IMPEX,, A PROPRIETORSHIP CONCERN, HAVING ITS
APHC010836262016
IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH
AT AMARAVATI
(Special Original Jurisdiction)
MONDAY,THE SIXTH DAY OF OCTOBER
TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE SMT JUSTICE SUMATHI JAGADAM
WRIT PETITION NO: 13471/2016
Between:
1. SAYEED AHMED IMPEX,, A PROPRIETORSHIP CONCERN, HAVING ITS OFFICE AT: G-17. GROUND FLOOR, 5-9-189, LENAINE ESTATE, ABIDS RAOD, HYDERABAD- 500001
...PETITIONER
AND
1. THE UNION OF INDIA, REP., BY ITS SECRETARY, MINISTRY
OF CIVIL AVIATION, NEW DELHI.
2. AIRPORTS
AUTHORITY
OF
INDIA,
VISAKHAPATNAM
INTERNATIONAL AIRPORT, VISAKHAPATNAM, REP., BY ITS
THE AIRPORT DIRECTOR.
3. THE
COMMERCIAL
MANAGER,
VISAKHAPATNAM
INTERNATIONAL AIRPORT, VISAKHAPATNAM.
...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 toto grant an order, direction or writ, more so in the nature of Writ of Mandamus declaring the action of respondent No. 2
and 3 in trying to evict the petitioner from the premises at Vishakapatnam International Airport, without granting any extension in relation to baggage wrapping services till the new license holder is appointed, is nothing but illegal, arbitrary, highhanded, violative of principles of natural justice, violative of article 14 and 19 of Constitution of India and with a consequent prayer to direct the respondents No. 2
and 3 not to evict the petitioner till the fresh lease of licence is granted through fair process and pass IA NO: 1 OF 2016(WPMP 16844 OF 2016
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 direct the second and the third respondent to continue the services of the petitioner for providing Baggage wrapping services in the Vishakapatnam International Airport and to pass Counsel for the Petitioner:
1. G KALYAN CHAKRAVARTHY
Counsel for the Respondent(S):
1. BETHAPALLI SURYANARAYANA (CENTRAL GOVT COUNSEL)
The Court made the following:
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:
Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the cause in the writ petition does not survive for adjudication and the writ petition has become infructuous.
Recording the submission of learned counsel for the petitioner, the Writ Petition is dismissed as infructuous. No order as to costs.
As a sequel, pending miscellaneous petitions, if any, shall stand closed.
__________________________ JUSTICE SUMATHI JAGADAM
6th October, 2025 cbn
THE HON’BLE SMT. JUSTICE SUMATHI JAGADAM
WP No.13471 of 2016
6th October, 2025 cbn