SAND, QUARRY BOATS MEN AND FISHERMEN CO-OP. SOCIETY v. THE STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH
Case at a glance
- Decided
- 27 Feb 2026
- Bench
- MAHESWARA RAO KUNCHEAM
Outcome
Dismissed
behalf of the petitioner, the Writ Petition is dismissed as infructuous
Provisions considered
- Constitution of India art. 226
- Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 s. 151
Key paragraphs
- Para 33. Recording the submission made by learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner, the Writ Petition is dismissed as infructuous. There shall be no orders as to costs. As a sequel thereto, the miscellaneous petitions, if any, pending in this Writ Petition shall stand…
Judgment
Cause title
THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE MAHESWARA RAO KUNCHEAM
WRIT PETITION NO: 19362/2019 Between: SAND, QUARRY BOATS MEN AND FISHERMEN CO-OP. SOCIETY LTD., NO. C119, APPANAPALLI, MAMIDIKUDURU MANDAL, EAST GODAVARI DISTRICT, REP. BY ITS PRESIDENT. ...PETITIONER
AND
1. THE STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH, REP. BY ITS PRINCIPAL INDUSTRIES AND COMMERCE DEPARTMENT, SECRETARY, SECRETARIAT BUILDINGS, VELAGAPUDI, GUNTUR DISTRICT.
2. THE DISTRICT LEVEL SAND COMMITTEE, EAST GODAVARI ITS CHAIRMAN/DISTRICT COLLECTOR, DISTRICT, KAKINADA, EAST GODAVARI DISTRICT, A.P. REP. BY
3. THE ASSISTANT DIRECTOR OF MINES AND GEOLOGY, RAJAMAHENDRAVARAM, EAST GODAVARI DISTRICT, A.P.
4. THE REVENUE DIVISIONAL OFFICER, AMALAPURAM DIVISION, AMALAPURAM, EAST GODAVARI DISTRICT, A.P.
5. THE EXECUTIVE ENGINEER, GODAVARI HEAD WORKS DIVISION, DAWALESWARAM, EAST GODAVARI DISTRICT, A.P.
6. THE TAHSILDAR, MAMIDIKUDURU MANDAL, EAST GODAVARI DISTRICT, A.P ...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 to pass an order or direction or writ, more preferably a writ in the nature of a writ of Mandamous declaring action on the part of Respondents 4 and 6 not allowing the petitioner society pro eed to run the ramp of Appannapalli contrary to their own proceedings in Ref. C/3257/2019 dt. 31-08- 2019 of the 4th respondent and Ref. C/452/2019 dt. 29-08-2019 of the 6th respondent are unjust, arbitrary, violative principles natural justice, unsustainable and consequentially direct the respondents 4 and 6 allow the petitioner society as per the proceedings dt. 31-08-2019 and 29-08-2019 and IA NO: 1 OF 2019 Petition under Section 151 CPC praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed in support of the petition, the High Court may be pleased to direct the respondents 4 and 6 to allow the petitioner society as per the proceedings in Ref. C/3257/2019 dt. 31-08-2019 of the 4th respondent and Ref. C/452/2019 dt. 29-08-2019 of the 6th respondent and to pass Counsel for the Petitioner:
1. BOKKA SATYANARAYANA KAMLA Counsel for the Respondent(S):
1. GP FOR MINES AND GEOLOGY (AP)
2. GP FOR REVENUE (AP)
3. GP FOR INDUSTRIES COMMERCE (AP) The Court made the following:
ORDER:
This Writ Petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India is filed for the following relief:
to pass an order or direction or writ more preferably a writ in the nature of a writ of Mandamous declaring action on the part of Respondents 4 and 6 not allowing the petitioner society proceed to run the ramp of Appannapalli contrary to their own proceedings in Ref C/3257/2019 dt 31.08.2019 of the 4th respondent and Ref C/452/2019 dt 29.08.2019 of the 6th respondent are unjust arbitrary violative principles natural justice unsustainable and consequentially direct the respondents 4 and 6 allow the petitioner society as per the proceedings dt 31.08.2019 and 29.08.2019
Today, when the matter is taken up for hearing, Ms. Neha Hassan, learned counsel representing Sri Bokka Satyanarayana Kamla, learned counsel for the petitioner would submit that in view of the subsequent events taken place in the lis, the cause in the Writ Petition does not survive for further adjudication and the Writ Petition has become infructuous.
Operative part
Recording the submission made by learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner, the Writ Petition is dismissed as infructuous. There shall be no orders as to costs. As a sequel thereto, the miscellaneous petitions, if any, pending in this Writ Petition shall stand closed.
27.02.2026. JLSR _____________________________ MAHESWARA RAO KUNCHEAM,J 269 THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE MAHESWARA RAO KUNCHEAM WRIT PETITION NO.19362 of 2019
27.02.2026 JLSR
Questions this judgment answers
What did the Court decide in this case?
The Court recorded the following disposition: behalf of the petitioner, the Writ Petition is dismissed as infructuous
Which statutory provisions did this judgment involve?
Constitution of India — art. 226; Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 — s. 151.
Which court decided this case, and when?
Andhra Pradesh High Court, on 27 Feb 2026. The bench was MAHESWARA RAO KUNCHEAM.
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.