Telangana High Court
WP/32489/2014 of Arakula Vikranth Vs The State of Telangana on 30 December 2014
SRI JUSTICE C.V.NAGARJUNA REDDY Writ Petition No.32489 of 2014 Dated 30th December, 2014 Between: Arakula Vikranth …Petitioner And The State of Telangana, rep.by its Principal Secretary to Government, Department of Consumer Affairs, Food & Civil Supplies, Secretariat
THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE C.V.NAGARJUNA REDDYWrit Petition No.32489 of 2014
Between:
Dated 30thDecember, 2014
Arakula Vikranth
And
…Petitioner
The State of Telangana, rep.by its Principal Secretary to Government,Department of Consumer Affairs, Food & Civil Supplies, SecretariatBuildings, Hyderabad – 500 022 and others …Respondents Counsel for the petitioner: Ms.J.Sumathi Counsel for the respondents: GP for Civil Supplies (TS)
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 for the following substantive relief:“…to issue any writ or order direction more particularlyone in the nature of writ of Mandamus declaring the impugnedaction of the 3[rd] respondent in issuing impugned NotificationF/1965/2012, dt.10.10.2014 for appointment of Fair Price Shopdealers earmarking Number of shops in favour of BC-Acategories and other communities in contravention of rule ofreservation as contemplated under the guidelines issued bythe Government in G.O.Ms.No.4, Consumer Affairs, Foodand Civil Supplies (CS-I) Department, dt.19.02.2011, as illegalarbitrary and violative of Art.14, 16 of Constitution of India andconsequently set aside the same.”
At the hearing, the learned Government Pleader for CivilSupplies (TS), on instructions, submitted that the respondents havewithdrawn the impugned notification.
In view of this subsequent event, the cause in the writ petition does not survive for adjudication. In the event a fresh notification isissued and the petitioner feels aggrieved thereby, he shall be free toavail a fresh remedy.
Subject to the liberty given to the petitioner as above, the writpetition is disposed of as infructuous.
As a sequel to disposal of the writ petition, W.P.M.P.No.40603of 2014 shall stand disposed of as infructuous.
30[th] December, 2014VGB
C.V.NAGARJUNA REDDY, J