Telangana High Court
WP/31073/2010 of M. Chandraiah Vs The State of Andhra Pradesh on 30 December 2010
MR JUSTICE C.V.NAGARJUNA REDDY Writ Petition No.31073 of 2010 DT.30.12.2010 Between: M.Chandraiah … Petitioner And The State of Andhra Pradesh, rep.by its Secretary Consumer Affairs Food & Civil Supplies, Secretariat, Hyderabad and others … Respondents Counsel for the
THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE C.V.NAGARJUNA REDDY
Writ Petition No.31073 of 2010
DT.30.12.2010
Between:
M.Chandraiah
And
… Petitioner
The State of Andhra Pradesh, rep.by its Secretary Consumer AffairsFood & Civil Supplies, Secretariat, Hyderabad and others … Respondents Counsel for the Petitioner:Sri N.Krishna Sumanth Counsel for respondents: AGP for Civil Supplies The Court made the following ORDER:
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 for a mandamus to declare the action ofrespondent Nos.3 and 4 in not supplying the essential commodities to thepetitioner’s fair price shop at Peerampally Village, Vikarabad Mandal, RangaReddy District, as illegal and arbitrary.
I have heard the learned counsel for the parties.
The grievance of the petitioner is that though his authorization is validand has not been varied in any manner till today, respondents have not beensupplying the essential commodities.
At the hearing, it has come out that after filing of the writ petition, a show-cause notice was issued to the petitioner alleging certain irregularities in runningthe fair price shop. The learned Assistant Government Pleader for Civil Supplies is unable to state whether any further step has been taken.
So long as the petitioner’s authorization has not been suspended orcancelled, he is entitled to distribute the essential commodities.
Accordingly, respondent Nos.3 and 4 are directed to continue thepetitioner as fair price shop dealer and allot the essential commodities to him solong as his authorization continues to subsist.
Subject to the above direction, the writ petition is disposed of.
As a sequel to disposal of the writ petition, W.P.M.P.No.39540 of 2010filed by the petitioner for interim relief is disposed of as infructuous.
Date: 30.12.2010VGB
(C.V.NAGARJUNA REDDY, J)