Disposed

Ponanna and Sons v. The State of Andhra Pradesh

Andhra Pradesh HC12 Mar 2024WP/6338/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Commission agent sought renewal of its agricultural marketing license for 2023-2028 without the security deposit conditions in G.O.Ms.No.85. The court disposed of the writ petition directing the petitioner to file a fresh application within one week, to be considered by the fifth respondent within two weeks thereafter.

What did the court decide?

Direction to petitioner to submit fresh application within one week; fifth respondent to consider it within two weeks. No order as to costs.

Ponanna and Sons Vs The State of Andhra Pradesh — Service and Employment | Andhra Pradesh HC (2024)

¶1

APHC010119472024

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI [3333] (Special Original Jurisdiction)

¶3

WEDNESDAY ,THE THIRTEENTH DAY OF MARCH TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FOUR

¶4

PRESENT

¶5

THE HONOURABLE SMT JUSTICE V.SUJATHA

¶6

WRIT PETITION NO: 6338/2024

Between:

Ponanna And Sons

...PETITIONER

AND

The State Of Andhra Pradesh and Others

¶12

...RESPONDENT(S)

¶13

Counsel for the Petitioner:

¶14

1.BONU RAMA SHANKAR RAO

¶15

Counsel for the Respondent(S):

¶16

1.GP FOR AGRICULTURE

¶17

2.GP FOR AGRICULTURE

¶18

3.GP FOR AGRICULTURE

¶19

4.GP FOR AGRICULTURE

¶20

5.B PRAKASAM

¶21

The Court made the following:

¶22

ORDER :

¶23

This Writ Petition is filed challenging the action of the respondents, particularly the action of the respondent No.5, in not renewing the license of the petitioner bearing license No. 508/2018 by considering his representation dt.20.02.2024 and insisting that the conditions with respect of Security Deposit to be fulfilled as laid down in G.O.Ms.No.85, Agricultural Co-operation (AM-II) Department, dt.06.11.2020 by violating the rule 50(2) 1966 by violating the rule 50 (2) of Agricultural Co-operation (AM-II) Department, dt.20.11.2020 as illegal, arbitrary and consequently direct the 5^th respondent to issue application and receive license fee with late fee and consider the representation of renewal petitioner’s license u/s.71-B of Market Act, 1996 for the period from 2023 to 2028 without insisting upon the Security conditions laid down in G.O.Ms. No.85, Agricultural Co-operation (AM-II) Department, dt.06.11.2020 in the interest of justice.

¶24

The case of the petitioner, in brief, is that the petitioner is having valid license for commission agent in the 5^th respondentAgricultural Marketing Committee, Adoni valid from 01.04.2018 to 31.03.2023. Though the petitioner submitted an application before

¶25

the 5^th respondent for renewal of their licenses before expiry of licenses period. But the 4^th and 5^th respondents even after receiving the said application neither rejected nor renewed the petitioner’s license, though the petitioner has paid the requisite fees. As such, the petitioner submitted representation dated 20.02.2024 to the 5^th respondent duly explaining his pathetic condition and requested to renew their licenses for the period 2023-2028. Despite the same, the respondents are not acting upon, for renewal of the license. Hence, the present Writ Petition.

¶26

Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned Government Pleader for Agriculture as well as Mr.B.Prakasam, learned senior Standing Counsel appearing for the respondent No.5.

¶27

Today, when the matter came up for hearing, the learned senior Standing Counsel appearing for the respondent No.5, Mr.B.Prakasham on oral instructions, informed this Court that the renewal applications are pending for consideration before the 5^th respondent. However, requested the petitioner to make fresh application..

¶28

In view of the above submission, instead of keeping the Writ Petition pending, this Court deems it appropriate to dispose of the Writ Petition, directing the petitioner to submit a fresh application to the 5^th respondent within a period of one week from the date of receipt of a copy of the order and the same shall be considered by the 5^th respondent within a period of two (02) weeks thereafter. No order as to costs.

¶29

Miscellaneous petitions pending, if any, in this Writ Petition shall stand closed.

¶30

____________________ JUSTICE V.SUJATHA

¶31

Pnr

Ponanna and Sons v. The State of Andhra Pradesh

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Ponanna and Sons 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

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Palakurthi Siva Kumar Vs Kantilal Dande IAS

Rongali Gangathalli Vs State of Andhra Pradesh

Syamatam Dhanalakshmi Vs the State of Ap

A.Rajavelu, Vs The State of Andhra Pradesh, Rep: by its Principal Secretary

Rongali Gangathalli Vs the State of Ap

Dr. B. Venkatesh Yalamarthi, W.G.Dist Vs Registrar, Dr.Ntr University of Health Sciences, Krishna and 2