Dismissed

Butti Raju v. The State of Telangana

Telangana HC31 Dec 2021WP/37365/2021

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

High Court dismissed a writ petition challenging the cancellation of a Fair Price Shop authorization. The court held that since the petitioner filed an appeal under the Telangana Public Distribution System Control Order, he cannot invoke Article 226 jurisdiction to avoid the alternative remedy. The respondent was directed to dispose of the appeal within two months.

What did the court decide?

The High Court directed the Joint Collector to consider and dispose of the pending appeal within two months from the date of receipt of the order.

Butti Raju Vs The State of Telangana — Consumer Protection | Telangana HC (2021)

¶1

HIGH COURT FOR THE S r^{s pi} iⁱ J' b iid'i,,;IiIF".",: rlt"\A N GA N A

¶2

FRIDAY, T-HE THIRTY FIRST DAY OF DECEIVBER TWO THOUSAND AND rWrrurV Or.tE'' --''

¶3

PRESENT

¶4

THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE T.VINOD KUMAR

¶5

WRIT PETITIONN O:3 7365 OF 2021

¶6

Between:

¶7

B l l["T3',' vi', :r!"'i[r ffir.T i,il5ht t lE i?.,p"11 U n^- e m p r o ve e, R/o H N o 3 - 7e,

¶8

AND

¶9

...PETITIONER

¶10

1 The State of Telanqana. RqO. bV.its principal Secretary, Consumer Affairs, Food and Civit Suppties,^-secretaribt oi,iiol^s, iiIE[";jT3,

¶11

2 The Joint Collector (C.S), Nizamabad District.

¶12

3 The Revenue Divisional Officer, Armoor, Nizamabad District.

¶13

4 The Tahsildar, Balkonda I\Iandal, Nizamabad District.

¶14

...RESPONDENTS

¶15

Petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of lndia praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed therewith, the High Court may be pleased to issue any writ or writs order or direction more particularly one in the nature of WRIT OF IVANDAMUS declaring the action of the respondent no.3 cancelled the Authorization of Fair Price Shop No.1805004 of Balkonda Village and N/andal, Nizamabad District vide Proceedings No.B3/3212020 on 0411012021 without giving any opportunity to submit an is illegal, arbitrary and violative of principles of natural justice and consequently set-a-side the Proceedings No. 8313212020, dt. 0411012021 passed by tfie 3rd respondent, in the interest of^justice and equity.

¶16

lA NO: 1 OF 2021

¶17

Petition under Section 151 CPC^praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed in support of the petition, the High Court may be^pleased to direct the 2nd respondent to pass orders on the Appeal dt.1711112021 filed by the petitioner to retain the F.P. Shop No,1805004 of Balkonda village and lvlandal, Nizamabad District, forthwith, pending disposal of the above writ petition.

¶18

Counsel for the Petitioner : SRl, MOGILI ANAVENI

¶19

Counsel for the Respondents : GP FOR CIVIL SUPPLIES

¶20

The Court made the following: ORDER

¶21

THE HON'BLE^{SRI JUSTICE T. VINOD KUMAR} WRIT PETI^{TION No. 3736s oF 2021}

¶22

ORDER:

¶23

This Writ Petition^{isfiled todeclare the action ofthe} respondent No.3^{in cancelling the authorizationof Fair Price Shop} No.1805004 of Balkonda^{village and Mandal, Nizamabad District,} vide proceedings clated 04.1O.2021 ,^{withoutgiving any opportunity} to the petitioner, as being illegal, arbitrary^{and violative of} principles of nat urai justice.

¶24

I'Ieard learned Counsel for the petitioner and the learned Government Pleader for Civil Supplies and with their consent, the Writ Petition is taken up for hearing and disposal at the stage of adrnission.

¶25

Admittedly, being aggrieved by the order of the 3',r respondent dated 04.10.2021, the petitioner has filed an appeal as provided under the Telangana State public Distribution System (Control) Order, 2O18 before the 2"d respondent_ on 1T.ll.2O2l and the same is pending consideration. Having chosen to avail the remedy of appeal, he cannot be permitted to invoke the jurisdiction of this Court under Article 226 of t]ne Constitution of India and to travel on two boats.

¶26

In view of the above, since the petitioner has already availed the alternative remedy by filing appeal, this Court is of the view that the 2"d respondent can be directed to consider and dispose of the appeal in accordance with 1aw within a period of two months from the date of receipt of a copy of this order.

¶27

¶28

5 Subject to the above direction, the Writpetition is disposed

¶29

of. No order as to costs.

¶30

Mjscel.laneous petitions, if any, pending in the writ petition. shall stand closed.

¶31

¶32

SD/.B.SATYAVATHI A.SSISTANT REGISTRAR ,TRUE COPY// lt .t ..,.--SECTION OFFICER

¶33

To,

¶34

The Principal Secretary, Consumer Affairs, Food and Civil Supplies State of Telangana, Secretariat building, Hyderabad T.S

¶35

The Joint Collector (C.S), Nizamabad District.

¶36

The Revenue Divisional Officer, Armoor, Nizamabad District.

¶37

The Tahsildar, Balkonda Mandal, Nizamabad District.

¶38

One CC to SRl. MOGILI^ANAVENI ,^Advocate [OPUC]

¶39

Two CCs to GP FOR CIVIL^{SUPPLIES, High courtfor the stateof Telanganaat} Hyderabad. [OUT]

¶40

Two CD Copies

¶41

B. One Spare^coPY

ABBASI

NPJ

,J t:

HIGH^GOURT

DATED^{i 3111212021}

ORDER

WP.No.37365 of 2021

€ S TA I.'
1 i{
q
i c2 tEB 2tl?2
.t
+
D re,.. -f i'.

¶52

DISPOSING OF THE WRIT PETITION WTHOUT COSTS @w* ffi

Butti Raju v. The State of Telangana

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Butti Raju v. The State of Telangana

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

Sri Sai Krupa Catering and Maintenance Services, Vs The State of Telangana

Sri Sai Krupa Catering and Maintenance Services, Vs The State of Telangana

Smt. Koduri Nagamani Vs The State of Telangana

J. Narsimha Yadav Vs Telangana State Southern Power Distribution Corporation Limited

Dr. K. Ravindranath Vs Telangana State Southern Power Distribution Corporation Limited

Ch.Sathi Babu Vs State of Telangana