Disposed

M/s. Sri Venkateshwara Traders and Another v. The State of Telangana and 4 Others

Telangana HC22 Mar 2022WP/7119/2021

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This judgment disposes a writ petition challenging the refusal to accept CMR rice and recovery of monies without costs, granting liberty to approach authorities for benefits under a subsequent G.O.

What did the court decide?

Liberty granted to petitioners to approach authorities concerned for benefits under G.O.Ms.No.22 dated 08.12.2021; no order as to costs.

M/s. Sri Venkateshwara Traders and Another Vs The… — Consumer Protection | Telangana HC (2022)

¶1

HIGH COURT FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA: AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction)

¶2

TUESDAY ,THE TWENTY SECOND DAY OF MARCH TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY TWO

¶3

PRESENT

¶4

THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE A.ABHISHEK REDDY

¶5

WRIT PETITION NO: 7119 OF 2021

¶6

Betwee n:

¶7

1 tVl/s. Sri Venkateshwara Traders, C/o. Aadivaraha lndustries, Sy.No. 228, Rangampalli. Peddapalli lvlandal and District, Telangana-SO1j74 and being Represented by its lt/anaging partner Sri M.Rajanna.^-

¶8

2 l/-.^{Rajgnna, S/o. Chandrayya, Aged about 62 years, Occ. Business, R/o. 4-} 135121C, Vasavr Nagar, Peddapalli

¶9

...PETITIONERS

¶10

AND

¶11

The State of Telangana, Rep. by its Principal Secretary, Department of Consumer Affairs, Food and Civil Supplies, Secretariai Buildings, Hyderabad.

¶12

Telangana State Civil Supplies Corporation Ltd., 6-3-655/1/A, 3nd Floor, Civil Supplies Bhavan, Punjagutta Rd, Somajiguda, Hyderabad, Telangana 500082 Rep. by its Vice Chairman and Managing Directoi.

¶13

Additional Collector, Peddapalli District, Telangana.

¶14

The Commissioner, Civil Supplies Department, Hyderabad, Telangana.

¶15

The District IVlanager, Civil Supplies Corporation, Telangana peddapalli.

¶16

.RESPONDENTS

¶17

Petition under Article 226 of lhe Constitution of lndia praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed therewith, the High Court may be pleased to issue an appropriate writ, order or direction, more particularly one in the nature of writ of Mandamus declaring the action of the Respondents in refusing to accept the cI/R rice from the petrtioners in furtherance of the Notice vide Lr. No. P. Ad mn/30/Dafaulters/2016 dated ollo3l2o21 and in further seeking to only recover monies from the petitioner as lllegal, arbitrary and u nconstitutio nal set aside the same and consequen y direct the Respondent authorities to accept the cMR rice from the petitioner for the paddy allocated in the Rabi Season 2018-19.

¶18

lA NO:¹ OF²⁰²¹

¶19

Petitionundesectionl5lcPCpraying.thatinthecircumstancesstated in the affidavit^{titeo n supJort'oftn" p"iltio"'.ir'"gion Court may be pleased to} stav the^{impugned notice'"ioJ i;-il"P Admn /i0/ Dafaulters/2016 dated} orl'oeii6zi^{p"iding tre disposal of the writpetition'}

¶20

Counsel^{for the Pet tioners:SRIPASHAMMOHITH}

¶21

Counsel^{for theRes pondent Nos'1'3& 4: GP FOR CIVIL SUPPLIES}

¶22

Counsel^{for theRes pondent Nos'2 & 5: SRI T'P'ACHARYA}

¶23

The Court^{at the ste 3e of admission made the following:}

¶24

¶25

THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE A. ABHISHEK REDDY

¶26

WRIT PETITION No.7119 of 2021

¶27

ORDER:

¶28

Heard leamed counsel for petitioners and learned Government Pleader for Civil Supplies appearing on behalf of rcspondent Nos.l. 3 arrd 4 and Sri T.P. Acharya, lcarned Standing Counscl appealing on bchall'o1' rcspondertt Nos.2 ancl ,5. With tlreir consent. thc present Writ Petition is bcing clisposed ol'at thc adnrission stagc itself.

¶29

Questioning^{the action ol the rcs;ronclsnts in refusing to} accept CMR rice fi'om the petitioners in furtherance of^notice dated 01.03.2021 and seeking to recover monies from^the petitioners, the present Writ Petition has been filed.

¶30

Learned counsel for the petitioners has stated that subsequent to the fi1ing of the^present Writ Petition,^the Government has issued G.O.Ms.No.22. Consumer^Al'fairs. Food arrd Civil Supplies^{(CS.l.CCS) Dcpartrncrrt,clatcd} 0(r.12.202 l, rvlrcrein certain benellts.^{ltave bcen given to the}

¶31

2 AAR, J W P.No.7l 19 ol 2O2l

¶32

millers. T re learned counsel also states that the petitioners

¶33

may be gr mted liberly to approach the authorities concerned fbr getting the benetits of the said G.O.

¶34

llavi rg regard to thc abovc. this Writ Petition is disposecl r1-grantinr: libcrtv to the petitir.ners to ntakc appropriatt application to the autltorities concc-rncd lirr availins th ' benclrts Lrnrlcr tltc sarcl G,O.

¶35

Misc:llaneous applications, if any pending, shall stand

¶36

closed. Thr re sliall be no order as to costs.

¶37

Sd/.K.SAILESHI

¶38

ASSISTANT REGISTRAR

¶39

//rRUE CoPY// G

¶40

SECTION OFFICER

¶41

To, 1. The Principa Secretary, Department of Consumer Affairs, Food and Civil Supplies, Ste te of Telangana, Secretariat Buildings, Hyderabad.

¶42

2, The Vice Chi irpqn^a1{!a1ag,ing^{Director, TelanganiState Civil Supplies}

¶43

Corporation I td., 6-3-655i1/A, 3nd Floor, Civil Suppties Bhavan, punjbi;utta Rd, Somatigr da. Hyderabad, Telangana 500082

¶44

1. The Addition I Collector. Peddapalli District, Tetangana.

¶45

The Commis ,ioner, Civil Sqpplies Department, Hyderabad, Telangana.

¶46

The District I !!?ge-r,^{Civil Supplres Corporation,Telanganapeddapalli.} 6. One CC to S RIPASHAIV MOHITH Advocate [OpUC]

¶47

One CC to S tl T.P.ACHARYA, Advocate topLlCl 8. Two CCs to tTwo CCs to tt

¶48

Two CCs to tTwo CCs to tt re GP for Civil Supplies, High Court-for the State of Telangana.

¶49

tourl

¶50

Two C.D. Co )tes 1 0. One Spare C )py

MRC \A$

HIGH COUR

DATED:2210112022

CC TODAY

,. ii: l': i rr. j t
o' i
.,'()-) 2 4 MAH 2022 ri
'-l
J - -!

¶56

ORDER

¶57

WP.No.7119 of 2021

¶58

DISPOSING OF THE WRIT PETITION WITHOUT C OSTS

M/s. Sri Venkateshwara Traders and Another v. The State of Telangana and 4 Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

M/s. Sri Venkateshwara Traders and Another v. The State of Telangana and 4 Others

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

M/s Sri Kaustubha Housing Projects India Private Ltd. Vs The State of Telangana

S.M.Somasekhar Vs The State of Telangana

Patti Raja Gopal Vs The Telangana State Information Commission

Boddu Lingaiah and 4 others Vs Union of India and 3 others

Chakali Ramulu and 3 others Vs The State of Telangana and 3 others

A.Suresh Goud Vs The State of Telangana