Dismissed

Desu Swamulu v. The State of A.P.

Telangana HC15 Apr 2015WP/10320/2015

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The single judge allowed the writ petition and directed the petitioner to file a condoned revision petition before the Collector and District Magistrate, Guntur, within four weeks. The District Collector was directed to dispose of the revision within four weeks thereafter, and the writ petition was dismissed.

What did the court decide?

Petitioner directed to file condoned revision before Collector and District Magistrate, Guntur, in four weeks; District Collector directed to dispose therein within four weeks thereafter.

Desu Swamulu Vs The State of A.P. — Service and Employment | Telangana HC (2015)

¶1

HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE R. KANTHA RAO Writ Petition No.10320 of 2015

¶2

ORDER:

¶3

Heard the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner and the Government Pleader for Civil Supplies for the State of Andhra Pradesh.

¶4

2. This writ petition is filed seeking writ of Mandamus declaring the orders passed by the 3^rd respondent dated 29.09.2009 confirming the orders passed by the 4^th respondent dated 20.10.2009 wherein the hawkership of the petitioner was cancelled, as illegal and arbitrary and for a consequential direction to set aside the same.

¶5

3. Learned counsel appearing for the petitioner would submit that the 4^th respondent has passed orders in Rc.No.24/2009-DT dated 29.09.2010 cancelling the hawkership of the petitioner without conducting proper enquiry. Aggrieved by the said order, the petitioner preferred a revision petition before the Joint Collector and as the same was not disposed of within a reasonable time, he filed a writ petition before this Court in WP No.26061 of 2014 seeking a direction to the 2^nd respondent to dispose of the revision. The learned single Judge of this Court disposed of the said writ petition on 17.09.2014 directing the 2^nd respondent to dispose of the revision petition within a period of four weeks. Thereafter, pursuant to the said directions, the 2^nd respondent –Joint Collector, Guntur, made an endorsement dated 01.12.2014 stating that the revision petition is time barred and also it does not lie before him. It seems that the revision petition is filed by the petitioner under the impression that it lies before the Joint Collector. Further, time had been spent by the petitioner in this Court by filing a writ petition to seek a direction for disposal of the revision petition. Under

¶6

these circumstances, the delay, if any, in filing the revision petition requires to be condoned. The petitioner is, therefore, directed to file a revision petition before the appropriate authority i.e., Collector and District Magistrate, Guntur, within a period of four (4) weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. On filing such revision petition by the petitioner, the District Collector, Guntur, is directed to dispose of the same within a period of four (4) weeks thereafter.

¶7

4. The writ petition is accordingly disposed of. Miscellaneous applications, if any, shall stand closed. No order as to costs.

¶8

__________________ R. KANTHA RAO, J

¶9

Date: 15.04.2015 BSS

¶10

HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE R. KANTHA RAO

¶11

¶12

Writ Petition No.10320 of 2015

¶13

Date: 15.04.2015

¶14

BSS

Desu Swamulu v. The State of A.P.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Desu Swamulu v. The State of A.P.

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

N.Venkatesulu, Vs The State of Andhra pradesh

M/s. Sri Lakshmi Venkateswara Minerals, Vs The Andhra Pradesh Mineral Development Corporation Ltd.

Y. Vijaya Lakshmi, Vs The State of Andhra pradesh, Rep. by its Principal

Vanipenta MaIlem Kondaiah, Vs The State of Andhra Pradesh

K.Shailaja, Vs The State of Andhra Pradesh

M. Narsappa, Vs The State of Andhra Pradesh, Rep. by its Principal Secretary