Andhra Pradesh High Court
WP/32074/2014 of PROPRIETOR, SREE SAI FILLING STATION, SRIKAKULAM DIST Vs SECY, MIN. OF PETROLEUM., NEW DELHI & ANOTHER on 15 September 2025
HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) [3459] TUESDAY, THE SIXTEENTH DAY OF SEPTEMBER TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SMT JUSTICE SUMATHI JAGADAM WRIT PETITION NO: 32074/2014 Between: 1. PROPRIETOR, SREE SAI FILLING STATION, SRIKAKULAM DIST,
APHC010159442014
IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH
AT AMARAVATI
(Special Original Jurisdiction)
[3459]
TUESDAY, THE SIXTEENTH DAY OF SEPTEMBER
TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE SMT JUSTICE SUMATHI JAGADAM
WRIT PETITION NO: 32074/2014
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. PROPRIETOR, SREE SAI FILLING STATION, SRIKAKULAM DIST, HPC PETROL & DIESEL PUMP, AT. S.NO.26/2 & 26/3, SARBUJULI VILLAGE & MANDAL, SRIKAKULAM DISTRICT, REP BY ITS PROPRIETOR, KOLLA BANDHAVI W/O. KOLLA RAMESH; AGED; 28 YEARS;
...PETITIONER AND
1. SECY MIN OF PETROLEUM NEW DELHI, REP BY ITS SECRETARY, MINISTRY OF PETROLEUM NEW DELHI.
2. HINDUSTAN PETROLEUM CORPORATION LTD, VISAKHA REGIONAL OFFICE, 0/O. PETRO NILAYAM, P.BOX.NO.135, VISAKHAPATNAM, REP BY ITS CHIEF REGIONAL MANAGER- RETAIL.
...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 to issue a writ order or direction more particularly one in the nature of Writ of Mandamus, by declaring the action of the respondent No. 2 in terminating the dealership of the petitioner as illegal, arbitrary, against, violate of article 14,19 and 21of Constitution of India and against the principals of natural justice consequently set aside the order Dt.25-04-2014 of the 2nd respondent which passed by terminating the dealership of the petitioner IA NO: 1 OF 2014(WPMP 40103 OF 2014 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 suspend the order Dt.25-04-2014 of 2nd respondent which passed by terminating the dealership of the petitioner forthwith, pending dispossal this writ petition before this Hon’ble court Counsel for the Petitioner:
1. CHALLA SRINIVASA REDDY Counsel for the Respondent(S):
1. DEPUTY SOLICITOR GENERAL OF INDIA
2. SREEKANTH REDDY AMBATI
3. B MAYUR REDDY The Court made the following ORDER:
Learned counsel appearing for the petitioner submits that the cause in the writ petition does not survive for adjudication.
Recording the submission of learned counsel appearing for the petitioner, the Writ Petition is dismissed as infructuous. No order as to costs.
As a sequel, miscellaneous petitions pending, if any, shall stand closed.
__________________________ JUSTICE SUMATHI JAGADAM Date: 16.09.2025 KAS