Dismissed

M/ s. Reddemma Auto mobile Workshop , v. The State of Andhra Pradesh

Andhra Pradesh HC6 Jul 2022WP/18881/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In a writ petition challenging a show cause notice for potential cancellation of sale deeds, the High Court held that no writ lies at the initial stage before a reply is filed. The Court dismissed the petition but granted liberty to the petitioner to submit a reply within three weeks, suspending coercive action during this interim period.

What did the court decide?

Liberty granted to submit reply within 3 weeks; coercive action under the notice stayed till expiration of the time granted.

M/ s. Reddemma Auto mobile Workshop , Vs The… — Company and Corporate | Andhra Pradesh HC (2022)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH :: AMARAVATI

¶2

THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE NINALA JAYASURYA

¶3

WRIT PETITION No.18881 OF 2022

¶4

Between :-

¶5

M/s Reddemma Auto Mobile Workshop

¶6

…. Petitioner

¶7

And

¶8

The State of Andhra Pradesh, rep. by its Principal Secretary Industries and Commerce Department, Secretariat, Velagapudi, Guntur District, Andhra Pradesh.

¶9

The Managing Director, The Andhra Pradesh Industrial Infrastructure Corporation Limited, APIIC Towers, Mangalagiri, Guntur District, Andhra Pradesh.

¶10

The Zonal Manager, The Andhra Pradesh Industrial Infrastructure Corporation Limited, Zonal Office, OWS Building, EMC-II, Near Airport, Tirupati, Tirupati District, Andhra Pradesh.

¶11

Deputy Zonal Manager (AM) & Commissioner, The Andhra Pradesh Industrial Infrastructure Corporation Limited, Zonal Office, OWS Building, EMC-II, Near Airport, Tirupati, Tirupati District, Andhra Pradesh.

¶12

…. Respondents

¶13

Counsel for the petitioner : Mr.Ch.Venkat Raman Counsel for the 1^st respondent : The Government Pleader for Industries & Commerce Counsel for the respondents 2 to 4: Mr.J.Ugranarasimha, learned Standing Counsel for APIIC.

¶14

ORDER :

¶15

Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and Mr.J.Ugranarasimha, learned Standing Counsel appearing for the respondent-Corporation.

¶16

The Writ Petition is filed seeking to declare the action of the respondentCorporation in issuing impugned notice dated 23.03.2022 calling upon the petitioner to show cause as to why action for cancellation of the sale deeds and for other actions shall not be taken. 15 days time was granted to the petitioner for submitting the reply.

¶17

¶18

At the time of considering the matter, it is submitted by the learned counsel for the petitioner that so far no reply/explanation was submitted by the petitioner to the said show cause notice.

¶19

As the challenge in the Writ Petition is to the show cause notice, this Court is not inclined to entertain the Writ Petition. However, considering the submission made by the learned counsel for the petitioner to grant some time for submitting reply, it is deemed appropriate to dispose of the Writ Petition by granting liberty to the petitioner to submit explanation/reply to the show cause notice dated 23.03.2022, within a period of three (3) weeks. On such submission of the explanation/reply, the respondent-Corporation is at liberty to pass appropriate orders, in accordance with Law, within a period of three (3) weeks thereafter. In the meantime, no coercive action pursuant to the show cause notice dated 23.03.2022 shall be taken.

¶20

With the above direction, the Writ Petition is disposed of. There shall be no order as to costs.

¶21

As a sequel, miscellaneous applications pending if any shall stand closed.

¶22

__________________ NINALA JAYASURYA, J

Date: 06.07.2022

THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE NINALA JAYASURYA

¶27

WRIT PETITION No.18881 OF 2022

¶28

Date: 06.07.2022

¶29

M/ s. Reddemma Auto mobile Workshop , v. The State of Andhra Pradesh

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

M/ s. Reddemma Auto mobile Workshop , v. The State of Andhra Pradesh

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Sara Suresh Kumar Vs Velaga Ramya Sudha

Katherapu Venkateswara Reddy Vs The State of Andhra Pradesh

Tirumala Setti Ramesh Babu, Vs The State of Andhra Pradesh

Shaik Farhaddurdana Nahid Vs State of Andhra Pradesh

Pamu Seshandra Kumar Vs the State of Andhra Pradesh

M/S Sri Ganapathi Auto Garrage Works Vs The State of Andhra Pradesh