Andhra Pradesh High Court - Amravati
M. Krishna Reddy vs The State Of Andhra Pradesh Rep By Its on 12 March, 2022
BEFORE THE NATIONAL LOK-ADALAT
HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH, AMARAVATI, NELAPADU
GUNTUR DISTRICT
(Under Section 19 of the Legal Services Authorities Act, 1987 (Central Act)
:QUORUM:
Hon'ble Sri Justice D.V.S.S.Somayajulu
Judge, High Court of Andhra Pradesh (Chairman)
Sri K.Ravi Kiran Kumar, Advocate, High Court of Andhra Pradesh
(Member)
W.P.No. 43121 of 2015
Petitioner(s) : M. Krishna Reddy,
S/o Subba Reddy, aged about 47 years R/o H No
41/609-B Sankarapuram, Chinna Chowk Kadapa
Respondent(s) : 1. The State of Andhra Pradesh Rep By its
Principal Secretary Excise Department Secretariat Buildings Hyderabad
2. The Commissioner of Prohibition Excise Hyderabad.
3. The Deputy Commissioner of Prohibition and Excise, Kadapa.
4. The Prohibition and Excise Superintendent, Kadapa, Kadapa District.
5. M/s Swapna Restaurant & Bar, Simhapuri Colony, Kadapa, rep. by Its Licencee.
Counsel for the Petitioner(s) : Sri O.Manohar Reddy Counsel for the Respondent(s) : G.P. for Prohibition and Excise 2 AWARD Dated: 12.03.2022 The petitioner filed this Writ Petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India to issue a writ order or direction more particularly one in the nature Writ of Mandamus declaring the action of the 2nd respondent in proceeding to issue Bar Licence w.e.f. 1.1.2016 for the 5th respondent Bar & Restaurant even though the same is located within the prohibited distance from the recognized Hospital and same is brought to the notice of the official respondents by way of written representation dated 26.12.2015 as illegal, arbitrary and consequently direct the 2nd respondent to consider the representation of the petitioner and pass appropriate orders before issuing the Bar Licence to the 5th respondent.
During the course of deliberation, both the learned counsel for the parties submit that in view of the subsequent developments, the cause in the present Writ Petition does not survive for adjudication; the Writ Petition has become infructuous and the Writ Petition can be closed as such.
In view of the above terms, an award is passed, closing the Writ Petition as infructuous, with the consent of both counsel before the National Lok Adalat Bench.
Petitioner (s) Counsel for the petitioner (s) Respondent (s) Counsel for the respondent(s) 3 The award/order on the above mentioned terms of settlement has been passed this the 12th day of March, 2022, At Amaravati, which has been duly signed by the parties and their counsel in our presence.
Chairman Member
(Seal of the Committee)