Disposed

N. Soujanya Devi, v. District Collector

Telangana HC25 Nov 2005WP/25157/2005

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court dismissed the writ petition challenging the cancellation of a Fair Price Shop dealership. The court refused admission because parallel proceedings were pending before the Collector under the Public Distribution System Control Order, directing the Collector to decide the revision within three weeks while staying the impugned order.

What did the court decide?

Writ petition disposed with direction to Collector to decide pending revision within three weeks; impugned order stayed; no costs.

N. Soujanya Devi, Vs District Collector — Service and Employment | Telangana HC (2005)

¶1

THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE V.ESWARAIAH

¶2

W.P.No.25157 of 2005

¶3

Dt.25.11.2005

¶4

Between:

¶5

N.Soujanya Devi … Petitioner

¶6

And

¶7

The District Collector, Mahabubnagar District and 3 others. … Respondents

¶8

ORDER:

¶9

The petitioner is the Fair Price Shop dealer of Peddadinna Village, Itikyala Mandal, Mahabubnagar District. After conducting enquiry, the Fair Price Shop dealership of the petitioner was cancelled by proceedings 31.10.2004 by the Revenue Divisional Officer, Gadwal. In fact, the authorization was suspended pending enquiry while issuing show cause notice dated 11.10.2004. Against the said order of Revenue Divisional Officer in cancelling her authorization, the petitioner filed W.P.No.21760 of 2004, which was disposed of on 29.11.2004 granting stay of cancellation pending disposal of the appeal before the Joint Collector, Mahabubnagar. Thereafter, the Joint Collector by the impugned order 3.9.2005 dismissed the appeal. It is stated that the said order was not at all communicated to the

¶10

petitioner. However, the petitioner obtained the said order on 13.11.2005 and filed a revision on 14.11.2005 which is numbered as CSI/918/2005 before the Collector (Civil Supplies), Mahabubnagar, under Clause 21 of the A.P.Public Distribution System Control Order 2001. It is stated that no orders have been passed on the said revision as well as on the stay application.

¶11

Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner as well as the learned Government Pleader for Civil Supplies.

¶12

Having regard to the facts and circumstances of the case, as there is stay of cancellation of the authorization pending disposal of the appeal and as the revision is pending before the Collector, I am not inclined to admit this writ petition as the petitioner cannot be allowed to prosecute parallel proceedings.

¶13

The writ petition is accordingly disposed of with a direction to the District Collector, Mahabubnagar District to consider and pass appropriate orders on the revision filed by the petitioner within three weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order, till such time the order of the Revenue Divisional Officer as confirmed by the Joint Collector in cancelling the Fair Price Shop dealership of the petitioner shall stand stayed.

¶14

The writ petition is disposed of accordingly. No costs.

¶15

(V.ESWARAIAH, J.) 25.11.2005

¶16

kpr

N. Soujanya Devi, v. District Collector

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

N. Soujanya Devi, v. District Collector

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

T.Suguna Vs District Collector, Prakasam district (civil Supplies)

B.V. subba Reddy Constructions, Vs Government of Andhra Pradesh

B. Prabhudas, Vs The Senior Divisional Commercial Manager

R.Ramakrishna, Vs Employees Provident Fund Appellate Tribunal

Dalit Welfare Seva Sangam, Vs Station House Officer

Mohan, Vs The Commissioner of Endowments