✦ Andhra Pradesh High Court · 03 Nov 2022

Oruganti Naresh Kumar v. The State of Andhra Pradesh rep., by its Chief Secretary, Secretariat & Ors.

No. 348 of 2012PRASHANT KUMAR MISHRA, D V S S SOMAYAJULU

Case at a glance

Key paragraphs

  • Para 33. Accordingly, this Public Interest Litigation is dismissed as infructuous. No costs. All the pending miscellaneous applications shall stand dismissed. PRASHANT KUMAR MISHRA, CJ D.V.S.S. SOMAYAJULU, J Nn 4 HCJ & DVSS, J PIL No.348 of 2012

Judgment

1.

This Public Interest Litigation has been preferred seeking the following relief: “…to issue a writ of mandamus declaring the action of the official respondents in not prohibiting the manufacturing and sale of Gutka and Panmasala and also in not restraining the sale of Tobacco products nearby 2 HCJ & DVSS, J PIL No.348 of 2012 Educational Institutions and to the persons below 18 years as illegal, arbitrary and contrary to the Provisions of

2.3.4 of the Food Safety and Standards Regulations 2011 the Cigarettes and Other Tobacco Products (Prohibition of Advertisements and Regulation of Trade and Commerce, Production, Supply and Distribution) Act 2003 and consequently, direct the respondents to prohibit the Gutka and Panmasala and further direct the respondents to prohibit the sale of tobacco products in any form within 100 radius of Educational Institutions and their sale to the persons below 18 years and to pass such other or further orders as this Hon’ble Court may deem fit and proper in the circumstances of the case.”

2.

It is a common ground that by issuing notification dated

06.12.2021, the State Government has imposed ban on sale of Gutka & Tobocco Products. Even though the said notification is under challenge in separate writ proceedings pending before this Court, the fact remains that the State Government has exercised its power to impose ban on the sale of Gutka. Therefore, this public interest litigation has been rendered infructuous. 3 HCJ & DVSS, J PIL No.348 of 2012

3.

Accordingly, this Public Interest Litigation is dismissed as infructuous. No costs. All the pending miscellaneous applications shall stand dismissed. PRASHANT KUMAR MISHRA, CJ D.V.S.S. SOMAYAJULU, J Nn 4 HCJ & DVSS, J PIL No.348 of 2012

HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE PRASHANT KUMAR MISHRA, CHIEF JUSTICE & HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE D.V.S.S. SOMAYAJULU P. I. L No.348 of 2012 (per Prashant Kumar Mishra, CJ) Dt:03.11.2022 Nn

Precedent status how later indexed judgments have treated this case

No known negative treatment found in the Courts & Cases corpus.

This is a result about the indexed corpus, not a finding that the judgment remains good law. Coverage may be incomplete.

Why is this linked?

This is the original judgment text, reproduced from the public court record. Always verify it against the official record before relying on it in a filing — check it on Andhra Pradesh High Court or eCourts case status (search case no. No. 348 of 2012). ← Search more judgments