The court affirms the petitioner can submit a fresh representation for conducting a public meeting, with a directive for timely response by authorities.

THURSDAY, THE FIFTH DAY OF JUNE TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE MAHESWARA RAO KUNCHEAM WRIT PETITION NO: 13811/2025 Between:

Geddam Vijaya Harsha Kumar ...PETITIONER AND The State Of Andhra Pradesh and Others ...RESPONDENT(S)

Counsel for the Petitioner:

1. BALAIAH B Counsel for the Respondent(S):

1. GP FOR HOME The Court made the following:

This Writ Petition is filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India for the following relief/s:-

“…to issue a writ order or direction, more particularly one in the nature of writ of mandamus declaring the inaction of respondents nos.2 and 5 the petitioner seeking permission for conduct a prayer meeting in memory of Mr. Praveen Pagadala, Schedule on 24.05.2025 at Rajahmundry, as illegal, irregular, irrational, arbitrary, unreasonable and voilation of princples of natural justice and offends Articles 14, 19 &21 of Constitution of India and contrary and violation of Andhra Pradesh Police Act, 1991 and Andhra Pradesh Police Manual Rules, Consequently direct the respondents nos.2 and 5 to grant the necessary permission and deployment of police staff and direct the respondents to comply with statutory obligations under the Andhra Pradesh Police Act, 1991 and Police Manual Rules for conducting the prayer meeting scheduled on 24.05.2025 at Rajahmundry and pass.…”

2. Heard, learned counsel for the petitioner and learned Government Pleader for Home appearing for the respondents.

3. On 22.05.2025, this Court has adjourned the matter for getting instructions by the learned Government Pleader, thus the matter is listed today.

4. Today, when the matter is taken up for hearing, the learned counsel for the petitioner submits in view of the subsequent events took place in the lis, he seeks permissions of this Court to withdraw the instant writ petition with a liberty to file a fresh representation before the 2^nd respondent-Superintendant of Police, Rajamahendravaram, East Godavari District., with all prerequisites for conduct of public meeting in the memory of Sri Praveen Pagadala and the same may be disposed, at the earliest.

5. Conversely, the learned Government Pleader for Home submits that due to efflux of time, the cause in the writ petition does not survive.

6. Taking into consideration the above submissions made by the respective counsel, this Court instead of keeping this writ petition pending, deems it fit and proper to dispose of the instant writ petition with the following terms:-

In the event of filing written representation with all prerequisites by the petitioner, the 2^nd respondent- Superintendent of Police, Rajamahendravaram, East Godavari District., is directed to dispose of the same, in accordance with Law, preferably within a period of four (4) weeks, from the date of receipt of such representation of the petitioner.

There shall be no order as to costs. As a sequel, miscellaneous petitions, pending if any, shall stand closed.