Telangana High Court
WP/25738/2007 of Mr.B.Motilal, Vs the Revenue Divisional Officer, on 24 December 2007
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction) TUESDAY THE ELEVENTH DAY OF DECEMBER TWO THOUSAND AND SEVEN : PRESENT : THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE: P.S.NARAYANA WRIT PETITION No. 25738 of 2007 Between: Mr. B.Motilal, S/o. B.Bhavanya Nayak. .....
TUESDAY THE ELEVENTH DAY OF DECEMBERTWO THOUSAND AND SEVEN: PRESENT :
THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE: P.S.NARAYANA
WRIT PETITION No. 25738 of 2007
Between:
Mr. B.Motilal, S/o. B.Bhavanya Nayak.
..... Petitioner
AND
The Revenue Divisional Officer, Bhodan, Nizamabad District.
Respondent
Petition under Article 226 of the constitution of India praying that in the circumstances stated in the Affidavitfiled herein the High Court may be pleased to issue an appropriate Writ, Order or Direction more particularly one in thenature of a Writ of Mandamus declaring the action of the Respondent in not passing the final order be subsequent to theorder in No. E1/1484/2006 dt. 18-4-06 as arbitrary, illegal and violative of Petitioner’s Fundamental rights guaranteed underArticle 14, 19 and 21 of the Constitution of India in the interest of justice.
The Petition coming on for admission upon perusing the petition and the affidavit filed herein and upon hearing thearguments of Sri Ravi Chander for Milind G.Gokhale, Advocate for the Petitioner and of Addl. G.P. for Civil Supplies for theRespondent.
The Court made the following ORDER:
“ Rule nisi. Call for records. List WPMP on 24-12-2007.
Sri Ravi Chander, the learned counsel representing the Writ Petitioner had placed strong reliance on thedecision of the Division Bench in Joint Collector, Kurnool Vs. A.Neelima (1996 (1) APLJ 285) and would maintainthat there is inordinate delay in completing the enquiry relating to the suspension pending enquiry. However,instructions are placed before this court by the learned AGP for Civil Supplies that on 30-10-2007 the authorizationin fact was cancelled. Sri Ravi Chander would submit this order was not communicated and only with a view to getover the inordinate delay, this order might have been thought of.
In the light of the facts and circumstances, let the RDO, Bodhan, Nizamabad, be present before this court on24-12-07. In the meanwhile no alternative arrangements to be made.”
SD/- P.SESHAGIRI RAO
ASSISTANT REGISTRAR
// TRUE COPY //
for ASSISTANT REGISTRAR
To
1.The Revenue Divisional Officer, Bodhan, Nizamabad District. (By Speed Post with a direction to be presentbefore this Court on 24-12-2007 at 10.30 A.M.)
2.Two CCs to Addl. G.P. for Civil Supplies, High Court of A.P.Hyd(OUT)
3.One CC to Sri Ravi Chander, Advocate(OPUC)
4.One spare copy.
SAH
HIGH COURT
PSNJ
NOTE: POST ON 24-12-2007
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
WP.NO. 25738 OF 2007
DIRECTION
DRAFTED BY: SAHAPPROVED BY: DRAFTED ON: 13-12-2007
HIGH COURT
PSNJDATED: 11-12-2007
NOTE: POST ON 24-12-2007
ORDERWP.NO. 25738 OF 2007