Andhra Pradesh High Court
WP/13670/2019 of M.Radha Vs State of Andhra Pradesh on 4 November 2026
LOK-ADALAT HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH, AMARAVATI, NELAPADU GUNTUR DISTRICT (Under Section 19 of the Legal Services Authorities Act, 1987 (Central Act) :QUORUM: Hon’ble Sri Justice D.V.S.S.Somayajulu Judge, High Court of Andhra Pradesh (Chairman) Sri K.Ravi Kiran Kumar, Advocate, High
BEFORE THE NATIONAL LOK-ADALAT
HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH, AMARAVATI, NELAPADU
GUNTUR DISTRICT
(Under Section 19 of the Legal Services Authorities Act, 1987 (Central Act)
:QUORUM:
Hon’ble Sri Justice D.V.S.S.Somayajulu
Judge, High Court of Andhra Pradesh (Chairman)
Sri K.Ravi Kiran Kumar, Advocate, High Court of Andhra Pradesh (Member)
W.P.No. 13670 of 2019
Petitioner(s)
:
M.Radha, W/o Gopi Babu,
Age 40 yrs.,
R/o Kondasamuduspalem,
Respondent(s) :
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. State of Andhra Pradesh,
Rep., by its Secretary,
Prohibition & Excise Department,
Secretariat Buildings, Velagapudi,
Guntur District.
2. The Commissioner of Prohibition
And Excise, & APSBCL, 88-2B, Kollafarum road, SER Centre, Prasadampadu, Currency Nagar, Vijayawada, Andhra Pradesh.
3. The Joint Collector, Ongole, Prakasam District.
4. The Deputy Commissioner of Prohibition & Excise, Ongole,
5. The Superintendent of Prohibition And Excise, Markapur, Prakasam District.
6. The Station House Officer, Prohibition and Excise Station, Kandukur, Prakasam District.
7. Kanjala Ramachandra Reddy, S/o Lakshma Reddy, age 40 yrs., Kandukur Mandal, Prakasam District.
Counsel for the Petitioner(s) : Smt. Marella Radha Counsel for the Respondent(s) : G.P. for Prohibition and Excise
A W A R D Dated: 12.03.2022
The petitioner filed this Writ Petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India to issue an appropriate writ order or direction more particularly one in the nature of Writ of Mandamus declaring the action of the respondent Nos.2 to 6 in allotting shop Serial No.175 in favour of respondent No.7 for taking lease of the premises Door No.7-2-225 for an amount of Rs.22,000/- per month rent dated 23.08.2019, where as the petitioner quoted Rs. 20,000/- per month and rejecting the petitioners shop premises No.2-42 as illegal, arbitrary and in violation of Articles 14, 19 and 300-A of the Constitution of India and causing loss to the revenue of the Government and consequently set aside the allotment of shop No.175 for the premises Door No.7-2-225 granted in favour of respondent No.7 dated 23.08.2019 issued by respondent Nos.2 to 6.
During the course of deliberation, both the learned counsel for the parties submit that in view of the subsequent developments, the cause in the present Writ Petition does not survive for adjudication; the Writ Petition has become infructuous and the Writ Petition can be closed as such.
In view of the above terms, an award is passed, closing the Writ Petition as infructuous, with the consent of both counsel before the National Lok Adalat Bench.
Petitioner (s) Counsel for the petitioner (s)
Respondent (s) Counsel for the respondent(s)
The award/order on the above mentioned terms of settlement has been passed this the 12th day of March, 2022, At Amaravati, which has been duly signed by the parties and their counsel in our presence.
Chairman Member
(Seal of the Committee)