Telangana High Court
WP/21680/2006 of Smt.M.Adilakshmma Vs State of A.P. rep. by its Joint Collector, on 28 December 2006
SRI JUSTICE C.V.RAMULU W.P.No.21680 of 2006 Dated:28.12.2006 Between M.Adilakshamma …..Petitioner and 1. The State of AP., rep., by its Joint Collector, Ongole, Prakasam District and others. …Respondents THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE C.V.RAMULU W.P.No.21680 of 2006 ORDER:
THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE C.V.RAMULU
W.P.No.21680 of 2006
Dated:28.12.2006
BetweenM.Adilakshamma
and
…..Petitioner
1.The State of AP., rep., by itsJoint Collector, Ongole, PrakasamDistrict and others.
…Respondents
THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE C.V.RAMULUW.P.No.21680 of 2006
Citations and Judicial Treatment
Cited by
0
Decisions in the index citing it
Cites
0
Decisions referred to
In this index
0
Of the decisions it cites
Overruled / Questioned
0
No negative treatment found
Loading the citing and cited decisions…
This judgment in the centre: on the left the decisions it cites, on the right the decisions citing it. Colour is the treatment; choose a decision to open it.
ORDER:
This writ petition is filed seeking a Mandamusto declare the proceedings in RC.CS2/1390/2006dated 7.7.2006 issued by the 1[st] respondent whiledisposing of the appeal directing the 2[nd] respondentto conclude the disciplinary proceedings afterconducting due enquiry, as arbitrary and illegal.
It appears that the petitioner is the fair priceshop dealer of Venkatapurm Village, AddankiMandal, Prakasam District. While so, hisauthorization was suspended on 18.4.2006 by the2[nd] respondent-Revenue Divisional Officer, Ongole,for certain irregularities purported to have beencommitted by him. Aggrieved by the same, thepetitioner filed a statutory appeal before the 1[st]respondent-Joint Collector, Prakasam District, Ongole. On 7.7.2006, the 1[st] respondent thoughpassed an elaborate order, but ultimately, simplyconcluded that “ on perusal of records, it is seenthat the order of suspension was issued on18.4.2006 and disciplinary proceedings are notcompleted till today. Therefore, the petition isdisposed of with a direction to the Revenue Divisional Officer, Ongole to conclude thedisciplinary proceedings after conducting dueenquiry as is deemed fit within a period of 4 weeksfrom receipt of the order”. Aggrieved by the same,the present writ petition is filed.
While admitting the writ petition on
30.10.2006, this Court by an interim order directedthe respondents to continue the petitioner as fairprice shop dealer by suspending the proceedings ofthe 2[nd] respondent dated 18.4.2006.
Now, a counter and vacate stay petition have been filed by the respondents. In the counter, therespondents have denied the allegations made bythe petitioner and further asserted that the enquiryas directed by the Joint Collector was concluded.
However, in view of the interim order passed by thisCourt, final orders have not been passed. In fact,there is no embargo for passing final orders by therespondent-authorities.
In view of the above, the respondents aredirected to pass final orders and till such time, thepetitioner shall be permitted to distribute theessential commodities among the card holders.
Writ petition is disposed of accordingly. Nocosts.
rkk
___________
28-12-2006