Telangana High Court
WP/19185/2008 of N.Pulla Reddy Vs Government of Andhra Pradesh on 29 December 2009
SRI JUSTICE GOPALA KRISHNA TAMADA Writ Petition No.19185 OF 2008 ORDER: 1 Petitioner filed the present Writ Petition stating that he came to know that one more Electronic Weigh Bridge is required for establishment at Gaddi Annaram fruit market and hence he made several representations to the
THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE GOPALA KRISHNA TAMADAWrit Petition No.19185 OF 2008
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:
1Petitioner filed the present Writ Petition stating that he came toknow that one more Electronic Weigh Bridge is required for establishmentat Gaddi Annaram fruit market and hence he made several representationsto the authorities concerned for allotment of space on lease forestablishment of an Electronic Weigh Bridge. But, as no action wasinitiated, he approached this court and filed Writ Petition No.18537 of 2007,which was disposed of on 15.11.2007 giving liberty to the petitioner tondmake a representation to the 2respondent within two weeks from thenddate of the order and further directed the 2respondent to consider anddispose of the representation to be made by the petitioner within a periodof four weeks thereafter.Subsequently the petitioner made andrepresentation to the 2respondent on 22.11.2007.Petitioner furtherasserts that despite the order of this court in Writ Petition No.18537 ofnd2007 as the 2respondent did not consider his representation dated22.11.2007 he filed Contempt Case No.239 of 2008 and after filing the saidndContempt Case, the 2respondent rejected his representation on theground that one weigh bridge is already working in the fruit market atGaddi Annaram and due to heavy traffic congestion it has been shifted tothe back side of the market from the entrance side due to non availabilityof space for establishment of another weigh bridge. As a result, the saidcontempt case was closed giving liberty to the petitioner to question thendsaid rejection order dated 11.12.2007 passed by the 2respondent.
2Petitioner further states that the 1strespondent by his letter datedrd30.05.2005 communicated to the 3respondent stating that sufficientspace is available at both the market yards i.e. at Fruit Market, GaddiAnnaram and Vegetable Market Yard, Bownepally and requested to accordpermission for allotment of site on lease basis for installation of ElectronicWeigh Bridge at both the market yards.The 1strespondent furtherrdrequested the 3respondent by letter dated 12.02.2006 to explore the ndpossibilities for establishment of 2weigh bridge at Gaddi Annaram FruitMarket and if there is need, tenders be called for and to furnish report.ndThe grievance of the petitioner is that though the 2respondent is wellaware of the above correspondence between the 1stand 3rdrespondentsand though he is aware of the fact that there is a need for establishment ofsecond weigh bridge, with a malafide intention had rejected hisrepresentation without taking it into consideration. Hence he approachedthis court and filed the present Writ Petition.
3Heard both sides.
4Having regard to the fact that the petitioner had already made arepresentation to the petitioner on 22.11.2007 and since it is his grievancendthat the 2respondent had rejected the same without considering hisrequest, this Writ Petition is disposed of with a direction to therespondents to give preference in considering the application of thendpetitioner for allotment of weigh bridge at the 2respondent market yard.No costs.
kvsn
---------------
29-12-2009