APHC010551982025 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI [3328]

(Special Original Jurisdiction)

WEDNESDAY,THE EIGHTEENTH DAY OF FEBRUARY TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY SIX PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE GANNAMANENI RAMAKRISHNA PRASAD WRIT PETITION NO: 28984 OF 2025 Between:

1. S OMPALLI SANTHAMMA,, W/O LATE KOTAIAH AGED ABOUT 76 YEARS,R/O- H.NO. 8-9-24, LINGA RAO STREET, NEARZANDA CHETTU, BALAJIRAOPET, TENALI, GUNTUR DISTRICT, ANDHRA PRADESH ...PETITIONER AND

1. T HE STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH, REP.BY ITS PRINCIPAL SECRETARY, MUNICIPAL ADMINISTRATION AND URBAN DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT, PRIME HILLS CREST,4TH FLOOR, NEAR DGP OFFICE, BESIDE ULTRATECH READY MIX PLANT, VADDESAWARAM VILLAGE, MANGALAGIRI, ANDHRA PRADESH-

522501

2. T HE TENALI MUNICIPALITY, REPRESENTED BY ITS COMMISSIONER TENALI, GUNTUR DISTRICT, ANDHRA PRADESH.

3. K ONDEPU SAI TEJA, S/O LATE KONDEPU SRIRAMULU, AGED ABOUT 32 YEARS, R/O- D.NO.8-19-58, OPPOSITE TO RAILWAY STATION, TENALI, GUNTUR DISTRICT, TENALI ...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 topleased to pass an order, writ or direction more particularly one in the nature of writ of Mandamus declaring the action of Respondents No.2 in issuing the Trade license vide TL/00573/2016 in favour of Respondent No.3 as illegal, arbitrary, mala fide and against the Constitutional guarantees more particuia.dy violative of Article 300A of the Constitution of India in the interests of justice and consequently direct the Respondent authorities to consider the representation dated 06.09.2025 by the Petitioner herein and cancel the trade license issued in the name of Respondent No.3 on behalf of Santamma Cool Drinks Counsel for the Petitioner: 1. UMESH CHANDRA P V G Counsel for the Respondent(S):

1. Sireesha Rani Vallabhaneni,Standing Counsel For Municipalities

2. GP MUNCIPAL ADMN AND URBAN DEV AP The Court made the following ORAL ORDER:

Heard Sri P.V.G. Umesh Chandra, Ld. Counsel for the Writ Petitioner and Ms. Sireesha Rani Vallabhaneni, Ld. Standing Counsel for the Municipalities.

2. Vide Order dated 28.11.2025, this Court had directed the Ld. Counsel for the Writ Petitioner to take out personal notice on Unofficial Respondent No.3 by RPAD and file proof of service in the Registry. Despite grant of opportunity to serve on the Unofficial Respondent No.3, the Writ Petitioner herein, till today, could not serve the personal notice on the Unofficial Respondent No.3. Memo filed on 17.12.2025 by the Ld. Counsel for the Writ Petitioner would indicate that the notice sent by the Ld. Counsel has not been served on the Unofficial Respondent inasmuch as the 1^st postal endorsement indicates that „addressee left without instruction‟ on 02.12.2025; and, the 2^nd postal endorsement dated 06.12.2025 indicate that the notice could not be delivered due to “insufficient address”. Despite this, the Writ Petitioner has not evinced any interest in taking steps to serve on the Unofficial Respondent No.3 by substituted service.

3. The present Writ Petition is filed seeking the following relief:

“Hence, it is prayed that Hon’ble Court may be pleased to pass an order, writ or direction more particularly one in the nature of writ of Mandamus declaring the action of Respondents No.2 in issuing the Trade license vide TL/00573/2016 in favour of Respondent No.3 as illegal, arbitrary, mala fide and against the Constitutional guarantees more particularly violative of Article 300A of the Constitution of India in the interests of justice and consequently direct the Respondent authorities to consider the representation dated 06.09.2025 by the Petitioner herein and cancel the trade license issued in the name of Respondent No.3 on behalf of “Santamma Cool Drinks” and to pass such other order or orders as this Hon’ble court may deem fit and proper in the circumstances of the case.”

4. The Ld. Counsel for the Writ Petitioner would submit