Telangana High Court
WP/28126/2008 of K.Prabhakar, Vs The District Collector, on 24 December 2008
COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction) WEDNESDAY, THE TWENTY FOURTH DAY OF DECEMBER TWO THOUSAND AND EIGHT PRESENT THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE C.V.RAMULU WRIT PETITION NO:28126 of 2008 Between: K.Prabhakar, S/o. Laxmaiah, R/o. Togarpalli Village, Kondapur
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD(Special Original Jurisdiction)
WEDNESDAY, THE TWENTY FOURTH DAY OF DECEMBERTWO THOUSAND AND EIGHT
PRESENT
THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE C.V.RAMULU
WRIT PETITION NO:28126of2008
Between:
K.Prabhakar, S/o. Laxmaiah,
R/o. Togarpalli Village, Kondapur Mandal, Medak District.
AND
..... PETITIONER
1 The District Collector, (Civil Supplies), Medak District, atSangareddy 2 The joint Collector, Medak District, at Sangareddy 3 The Tahasildar, kondapur Mandal, Medak District.
.....RESPONDENTS
Petition under Article 226 of the constitution of India praying thatin the circumstances stated in the Affidavit filed herein the High Courtwill be pleased to issue a Writ of Mandamus or any other appropriatewrit, order or direction, declaring the action of the 1st Respondent notdisposing the revision despite the elapse of more than two months isillegal, arbitrary, unjust and as such the same is declared as illegaland consequently, direct the 3rd respondent to revoke the suspensionorder passed dated 23.10.2008 in impugned proceedingsNo.B/127/2008 suspending the authorization of the petitioner's FairPrice Shop Dealership of Togarpalli Village, Kondapur Mandal, MedakDistrict, as illegal, arbitrary, unjustified and unconstitutional besidesbeing violative of principles of natural justice an consequently set-aside the same by entitling the Petitioner to function as Fair PriceShop Dealer.
Counsel for the Petitioner:MR.SYED LATEEF
Counsel for the Respondents:GP FOR CIVIL SUPPLIES
The Court made the following :
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 mandamus declaring theaction of the first respondent in not disposing of the revision filedbefore him by the petitioner being aggrieved by the order, dated21.07.2008 passed by the second respondent, as arbitrary and illegal.
There is no necessity of going into all the details. The case of thepetitioner is that the petitioner has already filed a revision petitionbefore the first respondent aggrieved by the order, dated 21.07.2008passed by the second respondent in dismissing the appeal filed byhim. The grievance of the petitioner is that so far, no orders have beenpassed thereon.
Under those circumstances, without expressing any opinion onmerits, the first respondent is directed to dispose of the revision petitionpurported to have been filed by the petitioner being aggrieved by theorder, dated 21.07.2008 passed by the second respondent, within aperiod of four (4) weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this orderand communicate the same to the petitioner.
The writ petition is accordingly, disposed of. No costs.
________________
C.V.RAMULU, J
kvni