IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA AT HYDERABAD THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE N.TUKARAMJI WRIT PETITION No.13921 OF 2019 DATE: 11.02.2026 Between :

PVR Cinemas Screen1 to 6 A/C, Inorbit Mall, Hitech City, Madhapur, Ranga Reddy District rep., by its Authorised Signature K Sai Krishna S/o Srinivase Rao, aged 42 years and ten others.

… Petitioners AND The State of Telangana., Rep by its Principal Secretary, Home (General-A) Department, Secretariat Buildings, Hyderabad and four others.

… Respondents.

O R D E R:

This Writ Petition is filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India seeking the following relief:

“…To issue a Writ order of direction one or more particularly in the nature of the writ of Mandamus declare the action of the respondents in not permitting the petitioners to run their theatres as per the rates mentioned in their applications though the G O Ms No.100 dated 26.04.2013 issued by the 1st respondent is set aside by virtue of orders passed in WP NO.18779 of 2014 and batch dated 31.10.2016 allowing the cinema theatres to run as per the rates informed to the licensing authority as illegal and arbitrary and to permit the petitioners to collect price deemed appropriate by them as per their applications dated 06.07.2019……..”

2. Mr. Muralidhar, learned counsel representing Mr. V.V. Satish, learned counsel for the petitioners, submits that the present writ petition has been filed challenging the action of the respondent authorities in not permitting the petitioners to operate their theatres in accordance with the rates prescribed under G.O.Ms. No. 100 dated 26.04.2013.

3. Learned Assistant Government Pleader for Home submits that during the pendency of the present writ petition, a subsequent Government Order, namely G.O.Ms. No. 120 dated 21.12.2020, was issued, which superseded G.O.Ms. No. 100 dated 26.04.2013. It is contended that in view of the issuance of the subsequent Government Order governing the field, the grievance raised by the petitioners no longer survives.

Accordingly, dismissal of the writ petition is sought. 4. I have perused the material placed on record.

5. Having considered the contentions advanced and the developments that have taken place during the pendency of this writ petition, particularly the issuance of G.O.Ms. No. 120 dated 21.12.2020 superseding the earlier Government Order, it is evident that the cause of action on which the writ petition was founded no longer subsists. In view of the subsequent policy decision replacing the earlier Government Order, nothing further remains for adjudication in the present matter.

6. Accordingly, this petition is dismissed as infructuous. No costs.

Pending miscellaneous applications, if any, shall stand closed.

_______________ N.TUKARAMJI, J Date: 11.02.2026

MRKR