Disposed

Sri Vanka Janardhan, v. The State of Andhra Pradesh

Telangana HC17 Dec 2004WP/22459/2004

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Single judge issued an interim direction in a writ petition challenging a suspension order of a fair price shop dealer. The court noted the show cause notice was served after the inquiry date but directed respondents to enable the petitioner to function as a dealer pending records.

What did the court decide?

Interim direction to enable the petitioner to continue functioning as a fair price shop dealer.

Sri Vanka Janardhan, Vs The State of… — Pension and Retirement Benefits | Telangana HC (2004)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD

¶2

(SPECIAL ORIGINAL JURISDICTION)

¶3

THURSDAY THE NINTH DAY OF DECEMBER

¶4

TWO THOUSAND AND FOUR

¶5

PRESENT :

¶6

THE HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE: L. NARASIMHA REDDY

¶7

WRIT PETITION No. 22459 of 2004

¶8

Between:

¶9

Sri Vanka Janardhan S/o Sri V. Balaiah

¶10

…Petitioner

¶11

AND

¶12

1. The State of Andhra Pradesh, rep by the Revenue Ddivisional Officer, Gudur, Nellore District

¶13

2. The Mandal Revenue officer, Chittamur Mandal, Nellore District

¶14

3. The Revenue Inspector, O/o The M.R.O. Chittamur Mandal, Nellore

¶15

…Respondents

¶16

Petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed herein, the High Court will be pleased to issue a Writ, Direction or Order, more particularly in the nature of a Writ of mandamus, holding the action of the 1st Respondent in issuing the show cause notice cum suspension order in Rc.C. 3900/2004 dated 1-11-2004 that was received by the Petitioner on 22-11-2004 as illegal and arbitrary, opposed to the principles of natural justice and unconstitutional and consequently set aside the same, thereby directing the respondents to continue the Petitioner as the Dealer of Fair Price Shop at Gannangidibba .

¶17

The petition coming on for hearing, upon perusing the petition and the affidavit filed therein and upon hearing the arguments of Mr. Srinivas Sivaraju Advocate for the petitioner and of G.P for Civil Supplies for the Respondents. The Court made the following

¶18

ORDER:

¶19

“ Learned Government Pleader for Civil Supplies seeks one week time to secure the records.

¶20

Post on 17-12-04.

¶21

Prima facie, the impugned order discloses that the petitioner was required to appear before the 1^st respondent on 10-11-04 in the enquiry, where as the copy of the same was served upon the Petitioner on 22-112004.

¶22

In that view of the matter, there shall be interim direction to the respondents to enable the petitioner to function as fair price shop dealer.

¶23

ASSISTANT REGISTRAR

¶24

// TRUE COPY //

¶25

for ASSISTANT REGISTRAR

¶26

¶27

1. The Revenue Divisional Officer, state of A.P., Gudur, Nellore District 2. The Mandal Revenue officer, Chittamur Mandal, Nellore District

¶28

3. The Revenue Inspector, O/o The M.R.O. Chittamur Mandal, Nellore

¶29

4. Two CC’s to G.P for Civil Supplies, High court of A.P., Hyderabad

¶30

5. One Spare Copy

Skm

HIGH COURT

LNR,J

DATED: 09-12-2004

¶35

NOTE: POST ON 17-12-2004

¶36

ORDER

¶37

W.P.NO. 22459 OF 2004

¶38

INTERIM DIRECTION

¶39

Skm Drafted on: 10-12-2004

¶40

HIGH COURT

¶41

LNR,J

¶42

DATED: 09-12-2004

¶43

NOTE: POST ON 17-12-2004

¶44

ORDER

¶45

W.P.NO. 22459 OF 2004

¶46

INTERIM DIRECTION

Sri Vanka Janardhan, v. The State of Andhra Pradesh

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Sri Vanka Janardhan, 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

P.Kasthuraiah Vs The Dist Collector

Kandukuri Kishore Kumar, Vs The Executive Officer

M.Polaiah Vs The Dist Collector

M. Aruna W/o Prasad Vs The RevenueDivisional Officer

Sri.K.Ashok Vs a.P.Transco

R.Pitchaiah Vs The Joint Collector