M/s Sai Nine Enterprises v. Department
Case at a glance
- Decided
- 25 Mar 2026
- Bench
- APARESH KUMAR SINGH, APAR
Provisions considered
Key paragraphs
- Para 44. Accordingly, the writ petition is disrnissed as withdrawn. There shall bt: rlo order as to costs \4iscellaneous applications pending, if any. shall stand closed. SD/. MOHD. ISMAIL DEPUW REGISTRAR OFFICER /TRUE COPYII To
Judgment
Cause title
Counsel for the Petitioner: SRI M.VENKATRAMANA FOR SRI M.GOVIND REODY Counsel for the Respondents: DEPUW SOLICITOR GENERAL OF INDIA The Court made the following: ORDER IN THE HTGH COURT FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA AT HYDERABAD THE HON'BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE SRI APAR,ESH KUMAR SINGH AND THE HON'BI,E SRI JUSTICB G.M.MOHIUDDIN WRIT PETITION No.l L26O of 2023 Dated: 25.03.2026 Between: M/s. Sai Nine Enterprises The Union ot'lndia, Rep. by its Joint Secretary, MinisLry of [rinance, Revenue Department, 46, North Block, New Delhi - I l0 001, and 3 others.
ORDER:
Petitioner ...Respondents Learned counsel Sri M.Venkatramana, representing learned counsel Sri M.Govind Reddy, appears for the petitioner.
The writ petition is preferred seeking the following relief: "F'or the reasons stated in the accompanying affidavit, the petitioner hereirr prays that tlris FIon'ble Court may be pleased to issue a writ, order or direction rnorc particularly one in the nature of writ of 2 Mandamus declaring the action of thc l't respondent in issuiug rrotification No.28/2020 dated 2i-6..2020 perperually perrnitting to import Tariff itern Maizc corn 1005 90 other tlicn seed quality to an extent of 5,00,000 Metric tons @ l5 percent duty/in-quota tariff rate in a financial year as being illegal, arbitrary, bad faitlr, irnproper motive. contrary to rvorld trade organisation agreements and in utter violation of principlcs of natural justice besides unconstitutional and pass such other order or orders in the circunlstances olthe case. "
Learned counsel for the petitioner seeks pennission o{'this Court to withdraw the rvrit petition.
Accordingly, the writ petition is disrnissed as withdrawn. There shall bt: rlo order as to costs \4iscellaneous applications pending, if any. shall stand closed. SD/. MOHD. ISMAIL DEPUW REGISTRAR OFFICER /TRUE COPYII To
One CC to SRI M.GOVIND REDDY Advocate 2. One CC to DEPUTY 3. Two CD Copies SOLICITOR GENERAL IN PSK. TKS HIGH COURT DATED:2510312026 l ORDER WP.No.1'{"26O o12023 -15= '( k\r. J/cl F 2028 il;,r, i, -\il <,. .,1 -11 ' j; ;'-,1?'?./,. o(J O B A.Pil ,k _09. .I -ii.l DISMISSING THE WRIT PETITION AS WITHDRAWN WITHOUT COSTS TrZ +l+lu
Questions this judgment answers
Which statutory provisions did this judgment involve?
Constitution of India — art. 226; Code of Civil Procedure, 1908.
Which court decided this case, and when?
Telangana High Court, on 25 Mar 2026. The bench was APARESH KUMAR SINGH, APAR.
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.