Telangana High Court
WP/4317/2006 of K. Rama Devi W/o Sri Madhusudhan Reddy Vs The Revenue Divisional Officer, on 26 December 2006
SRI JUSTICE C.V.RAMULU W.P.No.4317 of 2006 Dated:26.12.2006 Between 1.K.Rama Devi and another. …..Petitioners and 1.Revenue Divisional Officer, Mahabubabad,Warangal District And others. …Respondents THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE C.V.RAMULU W.P.No.4317 of 2006 ORDER: This
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.
Conclusion
THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE C.V.RAMULU
W.P.No.4317 of 2006
Dated:26.12.2006
Between
1.K.Rama Devi and another.
and
…..Petitioners
1.Revenue Divisional Officer,Mahabubabad,Warangal DistrictAnd others.
…Respondents
ORDER:
THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE C.V.RAMULUW.P.No.4317 of 2006
This writ petition is filed seeking a Mandamusto direct the respondents to release the essentialcommodities in respect of the fair price shops heldby the petitioners.
While admitting the writ petition on 24.3.2006,this court in WPMP No.5429 of 2006 granted interimdirection to the respondents to resume supplies ofessential commodities to the petitioners. Thereafter,third parties were impleaded.
On 14.9.2006, this Court directed the learnedGovernment Pleader to produce the original record. On 20.9.2006 the learned Government Pleaderproduced the original record. On a perusal of theoriginal record, it was found that the authorization ofthe petitioner was suspended on 18.01.2005 itselfand it was served on the petitioner on 28.01.2005.However, learned counsel for the petitioners asserted that the petitioners were not served withthe suspension order. Hence, the learnedGovernment Pleader was directed to serve copy onthe counsel for petitioners.
In view of the above, nothing remains in thewrit petition for adjudication and the same is liableto be dismissed.
Accordingly, writ petition is dismissed asinfructuous. However, it is always open for thepetitioners to work out their remedies as availableunder law.
rkk
_________
26-12-2006