Chennuboina Mamatha, vs The State of Andhra Pradesh, — WP/9842/2026

Case under Constitution of India Section 226. Disposed: Uncontested--DISPOSED OF NO COSTS on 10th April 2026.

Case disposed

CNR: APHC010195622026

Filing Number

WP/15732/2026

Filing Date

10-Apr-2026

Registration No

WP/9842/2026

Registration Date

10-Apr-2026

Judge

Maheswara Rao Kuncheam

Coram

Maheswara Rao Kuncheam

Bench Type

Single Bench

Category

WP ( 28 )

Sub-Category

MINES, INDUSTRIES AND COMMERCE (MISC.MATTERS) ( 32 )

Judicial Branch

WRIT Section

Decision Date

10-Apr-2026

Nature of Disposal

Uncontested--DISPOSED OF NO COSTS

Last updated 14-May-2026

Acts & Sections

Constitution of India Section 226

Petitioner(s)

  1. 1.Chennuboina Mamatha,

    Adv. CHETAN PONNURU

Respondent(s)

  1. 1.The State of Andhra Pradesh,

  2. 2.The District Mines and Geology Officer,

  3. 3.The Station House Officer,

    Adv. GP FOR HOME

Case History

  1. Case disposedDisposed

  2. 10-Apr-2026

    Maheswara Rao KuncheamView PDF

    Summary The Andhra Pradesh High Court allowed the writ petition and directed the release of the petitioner's seized tipper lorry upon payment of statutory seigniorage fees and penalties. The court held that Rule 26(3)(iii) of the A.P. Minor Mineral Concession Rules, 1966 permits only levy of penalty, not indefinite vehicle seizure, citing established Division Bench precedent that vehicles cannot be withheld pending penalty payment. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

  3. 10-Apr-2026

    Admission (Mines And Industries)

    Maheswara Rao Kuncheam

  4. 10-Apr-2026

    Case filed

    Registration No. WP/9842/2026

casestatus.in Summary

Summary The Andhra Pradesh High Court allowed the writ petition and directed the release of the petitioner's seized tipper lorry upon payment of statutory seigniorage fees and penalties. The court held that Rule 26(3)(iii) of the A.P. Minor Mineral Concession Rules, 1966 permits only levy of penalty, not indefinite vehicle seizure, citing established Division Bench precedent that vehicles cannot be withheld pending penalty payment. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

Explore other courts

District Courts Supreme Court
Search Another Case