Telangana High Court
WP/27515/2005 of V.V.Satyanarayana, Vs The Collector, on 26 December 2005
COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction) MONDAY, THE TWENTY SIXTH DAY OF DECEMBER TWO THOUSAND AND FIVE PRESENT THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE V.ESWARAIAH WRIT PETITION No. 27515 of 2005 Between: V.V.Satyanarayana ..... PETITIONER AND The Collector, West Godavari
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD
(Special Original Jurisdiction)
MONDAY, THE TWENTY SIXTH DAY OF DECEMBERTWO THOUSAND AND FIVE
PRESENT
THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE V.ESWARAIAH
WRIT PETITION No. 27515 of 2005
Between:
V.V.Satyanarayana
AND
The Collector, West Godavari District,
Eluru and 2 others
..... PETITIONER
.....RESPONDENTS
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:
Seeking a Mandamus, declaring the proceedings of the 1[st] respondent in Roc.CS-1/25/Revision/2005, dated 14.10.2005, as illegal andarbitrary, the present writ petition is filed.
Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned Government Pleader forCivil Supplies.
The petitioner is a fair price shop dealer of Appalarajugudem village ofT.Narsapuram Mandal of West Godavari district. It is stated that on the report of theMandal Revenue Officer, T.Narsapuram, dated 05.06.2004, giving details ofirregularities, said to have committed by the petitioner, which are grave in nature, theauthorization of the petitioner was suspended pending enquiry by the 3[rd] respondentvide his proceedings dated 09.06.2005. As against the said order, the petitioner filedan appeal before the 2[nd] respondent, and the appellate authority, while consideringall the contentions raised by the petitioner, dismissed the appeal by order dated18.06.2005. Aggrieved by the same, the petitioner also filed revision before the 1[st]respondent and the revisional authority also dismissed the revision by the impugnedorder dated 14.10.2005 while confirming the order of the appellate authority. But,however, it was only a suspension made pending enquiry and disciplinaryproceedings have not been completed.
Having regard to the facts and circumstances of the case, the 3[rd] respondent is directed to issue a show cause notice to the petitioner for passingfinal orders and to take appropriate action in completing the enquiry, in accordancewith law, after giving a reasonable opportunity to the petitioner, within a period of sixweeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order.
With the above observations, the Writ Petition is disposed of. No order as to costs.
________________
Dated: 26.12.2005
Dsr