Telangana High Court
WP/24043/2004 of P. Subba Reddy, Vs The Joint Collector, on 27 December 2004
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction) MONDAY, THE TWENTY SEVENTH DAY OF DECEMBER TWO THOUSAND AND FOUR PRESENT THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE L.NARASIMHA REDDY WRIT PETITION NO : 24043 of 2004 Between: P. Subba Reddy, S/o. Pakanati Veera Reddy, R/o. 113,
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.
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD
(Special Original Jurisdiction)
MONDAY, THE TWENTY SEVENTH DAY OF DECEMBERTWO THOUSAND AND FOUR
PRESENT
THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE L.NARASIMHA REDDY
WRIT PETITION NO : 24043 of 2004
Between:
P. Subba Reddy, S/o. Pakanati Veera Reddy, R/o. 113, Tyallur, Phirangipuram Mandal, Guntur District.
AND
..... PETITIONER
1 The Joint Collector, Guntur, Guntur District.
2 The Revenue Divisional Officer, Guntur, Guntur District.
3 The Mandal Revenue Officer, Phirangipuram Mandal, Guntur District.
.....RESPONDENT(S)
Petition under Article 226 of the constitution of India praying that in thecircumstances stated in the Affidavit filed herein the High Court will be pleased toissue any writ, order or direction more particularly one nature of writ of mandamusdeclaring the action of the respondent in rejecting the stay petition of the petitionervide order dt. 2-12-2004 and in not disposing of the appeal pending before in AppealCase No. 61/2004-S7 which was filed against the order of suspension passed bythe 2nd respondent in Rc.No. 5892/2004-G, dt. 28-10-2004 illegal, arbitrary,improper and against the principles of natural justice.
Counsel for the Petitioner: MR.K.SRINIVAS
Counsel for the Respondents: GP FOR CIVIL SUPPLIES
The Court at the stage of admission made the following ORDER:
The authorisation of the petitioner was suspended by the second respondentthrough order dated 28-10-2004 on certain allegations. The petitioner preferred anappeal before the first respondent. He also filed an application for stay. The firstrespondent refused to grant stay through order dated 02-12-2004. Hence, this writpetition.
Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned Government Pleader for CivilSupplies.
The suspension, against the petitioner is, pending enquiry. The second respondentalso issued a show cause notice signed on 09-12-2004 to the petitioner. The firstrespondent has refused to grant stay, pending appeal. This Court is not inclined tointerfere with the same, having regard to the nature of the allegations against thepetitioner. The question as to how far the suspension of the dealership is justifiedcan be examined by the first respondent while disposing of the appeal itself.
Hence, the writ petition is disposed of directing the first respondent to passappropriate orders in the appeal within a period of four weeks from today. No orderas to costs.
_______________
kdl
To
1 The Joint Collector, Guntur, Guntur District.
2 The Revenue Divisional Officer, Guntur, Guntur District.
3 The Mandal Revenue Officer, Phirangipuram Mandal, Guntur District.
4 Two C.Cs. to the Government Pleader for Civil Supplies, High Court Buildings, A.P., Hyderabad, (OUT).
5 Two C.D. Copies.