BharatTaxGST

Medarametla Jeevan Sai vs. The State Of Andhra Pradesh

Original PDF →
WP/17307/2021HC Andhra PradeshGSTCNR APHC01029442202131 March 2026Bench: K SREENIVASA REDDY6 pages
For Petitioner: V R MACHAVARAMFor Respondent: GP FOR HOME

No AI summary yet for this judgment.

Cause title — parties, addresses and appearances
APHC010294422021 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) [3327] WEDNESDAY, THE FIRST DAY OF APRIL TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY SIX PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE K SREENIVASA REDDY WRIT PETITION NO: 17307/2021 Between: 1. MEDARAMETLA JEEVAN SAI, S/O SOMASEKHAR AGE 3L YEARS, OCC BUSINESS IN MINERAL WATER, R/O VENKANNAPALEM VILLAGE, MANUBOLU MANDAL, SPSR NELLORE DISTRICT, ANDHRA PRADESH. 2. MEDARAMETLA SOMASEKHAR, S/O RAMASUBBAIAH AGE 59, 0CC. CULTIVATION, R/O VENKANNAPALEM VILLAGE, MANUBOLU MANDAL, SPSR NELLORE DISTRICT, ANDHRA PRADESH. ...PETITIONER(S) AND 1. THE STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH, REPRESENTED THE PRINCIPAL SECRETARY, HOME DEPARTMENT, A.P.SECRETARIAT, AMARAVATHI GUNTUR DISTRICT, ANDHRA PRADESH 2. THE STATION HOUSE OFFICER, MANUBOLU POLICE STATION, SPSR NELLORE DISTRICT, ANDHRA PRADESH 3. THE PANCHAYAT SECRETARY, VENKANNAPALEM PANCHAYAT, MANUBOLU MANDAL,SPSR NELLORE 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 toto issue a Writ, Order or Direction more particularly one in the nature of 'Writ of Mandamus' declaring the action of the respondents 2 and 3 in harassing the SRK, J W.P.No.17307 of 2021 2 petitioners by calling to the police station without any violation of law under the guise of violation of general law which is not applicable when there is special law that is. Food Adulteration Act under which the respondents 2 and have no power to file any case and threatening the petitioners and abusing the 1st petitioner by the 2nd respondent thus violating Article 19 and 21 of the Constitution of India consequently direct the respondents 2 and 3 not to harass the petitioners and not to call them to the Police Station IA NO: 1 OF 2021 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 2 and 3 not to harass the petitioners and to cause any interference in the water manufacture and supply business of the petitioners, pending disposal of the main writ petition Counsel for the Petitioner(S): 1. V R MACHAVARAM Counsel for the Respondent(S): 1. GP FOR HOME The Court made the following: SRK, J W.P.No.17307 of 2021 3 HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE K. SREENIVASA REDDY WRIT PETITION No.17307 of 2021

ORDER:

This Writ Petition has been filed seeking to declare the action of respondent Nos.2 and 3 in harassing and threatening the petitioners by calling to Police Station under the guise of violation of general law, which is not applicable when there is special law that is Food Adulteration Act under which the respondent Nos.2 and 3 have no power to file any case and threatening the petitioners and consequently direct the respondent Nos.2 and 3 not to harass the petitioners and not to call them to Police Station.

2.

Case of the petitioners is that 1st petitioner is an un- employee; in order to survive and to eke his livelihood, he established a mineral water plant in the name and style “Amma Water Suppliers” in his village Venkannapalem, Manubolu Mandal, SPSR Nellore District in clean environment with RO technology by obtaining certificate of registration called “AIIMS CERTIFICATION” dated 07.03.2020 valid for a period of 3 years for manufacture and supply of RO purified drinking water by complying with ISO 22000:2005 requirements. There are about 40 mineral water plants in Manubolu mandal, who are all following the same technology. Due to change of political scenario in Andhra Pradesh State, the local political leaders, in the Venkannapalem village, have been threatening the petitioners and causing hurdles in running the business. It is further stated that 2nd respondent called the petitioners to the police station and made them sit in the police station. 1st petitioner submitted all the certificates including the certification of “AIIMS CERTIFICATION”, the GST registration and the report of the water analyst, but he is not in a position to look into the documents and is insisting the petitioners to come to police station.

3.

Heard learned counsel for petitioners and learned counsel for respondents.

4.

The learned Assistant Government Pleader appearing for respondent Nos.1 and 2, on written instructions, submits that on 10.08.2021, 3rd respondent-Panchayat Secretary endorsed a letter to 2nd respondent stating that 2nd petitioner, without obtaining permission from the Panchayat, is maintaining Mineral Water Plant and supplying water to the villages and that, except the said representation, police did not receive any complaint and that, police are not competent authority to redress the said issue, except when there is specific directions from the competent authority or Court. He further submits that Police never called the petitioners to Police Station or never threatened or harassed the petitioners as alleged.

5.

Placing the written instructions submitted by the respondent No.2 on record, the Writ Petition is closed. No order as to costs.

6.

As a sequel thereto, the miscellaneous applications, if any, pending in this Writ Petition shall stand closed.

_________________________ K. SREENIVASA REDDY, J. Date: 01.04.2026 sj HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE K. SREENIVASA REDDY

Writ Petition No.17307 of 2021

Date: 01.04.2026

sj

Reproduced from the public record of the Andhra Pradesh High Court. Verify against the court's own copy before relying on it. Income tax judgments are on bharattax.net.