Dismissed

Anthony Marshall v. The Honble Institution of Lokayuktha for the State of Telangana and 12 Others

Telangana HC22 Apr 2022WP/9960/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The petitioner sought withdrawal of a writ petition filed under Article 226 challenging interim orders issued by the Lonayuktha and Prohibition and Excise Department. The High Court permitted the withdrawal and dismissed the writ petition without costs.

What did the court decide?

Writ petition dismissed as withdrawn; miscellaneous petitions pending, if any, dismissed.

Anthony Marshall Vs The Honble Institution of Lokayuktha for the State of Telangana and 12 Others — Telangana HC (2022) — LawSathi Research

¶1

HIGH COURT FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA AT HYDERABAD

¶2

(Special Original Jurisdiction)

¶3

FRIDAY, THE TWENTY SECOND DAY OF APRIL TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY TWO

¶4

PRESENT

¶5

THE HONOURABLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE SATISH CHANDRA SHARMA AND

¶6

THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE ABHINAND KUMAR SHAVILI

¶7

WRIT PETITION NO: 9960 OF 2022

¶8

Between:

¶9

Anthony Marshall, S/o. MVM. Michael, Aged about 38 Years, Occ. Business, Fi/o.^H. No. 17-82, Ram Nagar Colony, Alwal, Under GHMC Alwal Circle and Mandal, Medchal Malkajgiri District.

¶10

...PETITIONER

¶11

AND

¶12

The Hon'ble lnstitution of Lokayuktha for the State of Telangana, Basheerbagh, Hyderabad. Rep. by its Registrar.

¶13

The State of Telangana, Rep. by its Principal Secretary to Government, Prohibition and Excise Department, At BRK Bhavan, Secretariat^Building, Hyderabad, Telangana State.

¶14

The Commissioner, Prohibition and Excise^{Department,Having Officeat} Abkari Bhavan, Nampally, Hyderabad, Telangana.

¶15

The Deputy Commissioner, Prohibition and Excise^{Department,Ranga Reddy} Division, Medchal Malkajgiri District.

¶16

The District Prohibition and Excise Officer,^{Prohibition and Excise} Department, Medchal Malkajgiri District.

¶17

The Station House Officer, Prohibition and^{ExciseDepartment,t\4alkajgiri,} Medchal Malkajgiri District.

¶18

Telangana State Beverages Corporation Limited, Having^{its officeat ll Floor,} Prohibition and Excise Complex, 9 and^'10 Eastern,^{tvlJ Road, Nampally,} Hyderabad, Telangana, Rep. by its Managing^Direclor.

¶19

8- M/s- Sree Venkateshwara Wines, Rep. by^{its Proprietor and Licensee Gandra} Venkata Gopal Rao, S/o. Venkata Jithender^{Rao, Aged about 40 Years, Occ.} Business, No.04-O71lA and B Block, Flat No.^{405, Durgavihar'Pipeline} Road, Near Konark Hospital, Jeedirnetla, Quthbullapur.^{Medchal IVlalkajgiri} Distrlct.

¶20

¶21

Smt. S. Kristamma, W/o. Late Krishna Reddy, Aged about 68 Years, Occ. Housewife, Ri/o. Plot No. 13, Prashanthi Enclave, Khanajiguda, Trimulgherry, Medchal Malkajgiri District.

¶22

10.Sri. S.K. Venkat Reddy, S/o. Late Krishna Reddy, Aged about 44 Years, Occ Business, Rl/o. Plot No. 13, Prashanthi Enclave, Khanajiguda, Trimulgherry, Medchal Malkajgiri District.

¶23

11 Smt. D. Vanita, W/o. D. Narayan Reddy, D/o. Late K. Krishna Reddy, Aged about 55 Years, Occ. Housewife, Ft/o. Plot No. 13, Prashanthi Enclave, Khanajiguda, Trimulgherry, Medchal Malkajgiri District.

¶24

12 Smt. K. Maheshwari, Wo. K. Mahender Reddy, D/o. Late K. Krishna Reddy, Aged about 47 Years, Occ. Housewife, Ri/o. Plot No. 13, Prashanthi Enclave, Khanajiguda, Trimulgherry, Medchal Malkajgiri District.

¶25

13 Smt. T Madhavi, Wo. T. Shiva Kumar Reddy, D/o. Late K. Krishna Reddy, Aged about 42 Years, Occ. Housewife, R/o. Plot No. 13, Prashanthi Enclave, Khanajiguda, Trimulgherry, Medchal Malkajgiri District.

¶26

...RESPONDENTS

¶27

Petition Under Article 226 ot lhe Constitution of lndia praying that in the circunrstances stated in the affidavit filed therewith, the High Court may be pleased to issue a Writ, Order or Direction more particularly one in lhe nalure of Writ of Mandamus declaring the action of the learned Respondent No. 1 institution in taking the cognizance of the complaint of the Respondent No. 8 vide Complaint No. 15612022181 and in passing the interim orders, dated OglO2l2O22 directing the Respondent No. 5 shall consider issuing of goods to the person who is hav ng valid license for the premises and submit a report is contrary to law and withoLt jurisdiction and consequently set aside the complaint No. 1.5612022181 on thr: file of Respondent No. 1 / lnstitution of Lokayuktha for the state of Telanl;ana in the interest of justice and equity.

¶28

l.A.NC:1 OF 2022

¶29

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 stay all further proceedings in pursuant to the impugned complaint No. 15612022181 as pending on the file of learned Respondent No. 1 institution including stay of all further proceedings in pursuant to the order, dated Oglo2l2022 passed by the learned Respondent No. 1 institution pending disposal of the main writ petition in the interest of juslice and equity.

¶30

l.A.NO:2 OF 2022

¶31

Petition under Section 151 CPC praying that in the circumstances staled in the affidavit filed in support of the petition, the High Court may be pleased to direct the Respondent No. 5 to 6 to supply the stock to New Jhonny Wines having business place at premises bearing No. 1-31- 943/1 , situated at Kana.li,3uda, Opp. lndian Oil Petrol Pump, Ward No"^'135, Secunderabad 500 01 5. which was stopped by the Respondent No. 5 in pursuant of the interim orders

¶32

¶33

i I I I ! I I

¶34

passed by the Respondent No. 1in complaint No. 15612022181 , Dated 0910212022 in the interest of justice and equity.

¶35

!.A.NO:3 OF 2022

¶36

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 suspend the show cause notice No. 8116112022/DpEo(M), Dated 11-02-2022 which was issued in pursuant to the orders passed by the Respondent No. 1 institution in complaint No. 1561202218'l , Dated o9tozl2o22 in ihe interest of justice and equity.

¶37

Counsel for the Petitioner : SRI.POLICE VENKAT REDDY

¶38

Counsel for the Respondent No.1 : SRI.RAVINDRA YANAMANORA

¶39

Counsel for the Respondent Nos.2 to 7 : G.P FOR PROHIBITION AND EXCISE

¶40

Counsel for the Respondent No.8 : SMT.G.JHANSI

¶41

Counsel for the Respondent Nos.9 to 13 : SRI.B.ARJUN RAO

¶42

The Court made the following ORDER

I I I i

I i l

H F ST

AND

T I

w.P.No of

ORDER: (P.r tr HM'\L th Cti.IJ$tie .ta/tb C/vittra .thamd)

¶51

Learned counsel for rhe pedtioner prays for with&awal of the writ pedrion.

¶52

Permission is accorded.

¶53

The Writ Periuon is, accordingly, dismissed as withdrawn" No costs.

¶54

As a sequei, misccllaneous petirions, pending if any, stand

¶55

dis missed.

¶56

SD/.K.AMMAJI ASSISTANT REGISTRAR

¶57

//TRUE COPY//

¶58

SECTION OFFICER

¶59

To 1. Two CC to G.p FOR PROH AND EXclsE' High court for the state of Telangana at Hyderabad. (JtTjt* 2. 3. on,r on-. CC to cc ro SRt. SRt.poLtCE RAVINDRA UFL$I yANAMANonn,'nl"""1Jtl"fopUCiSFqqy, Advocate IopUCI 4. 5. 6. fl lwo ili F[ CD Cooies[^{sHrax*lifli,.-#:r:ii?i?JBil;""'"'} 7. Ont; spare copy S.A GJP dt Y

¶60

l ! I I I i : ii !I I I I I !

¶61

HIGH COURT DAI'ED:2210412022

ORDER

*."
$tt TilI.
$5
.i:

WP.No.9960 of 2022

DISMII3SING THE W.P

AS WITHDRAWN WITHOUT COSTS.

¶67

Anthony Marshall v. The Honble Institution of Lokayuktha for the State of Telangana and 12 Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Anthony Marshall v. The Honble Institution of Lokayuktha for the State of Telangana and 12 Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Chinya Keloth, Nizamabad Dist Vs the Govt. of a.P., Hyd and Another

M/s. Haricons Engineers and Contractors Vs Sri. Gurijala Sudhakar Reddy

D.M., Tsrtc Vs Gollamandala Subba Raju and Ano.

P. Linga Das, Vs D. Prabhakar and 6 Ors.

N.Mohan, Vs State of Andhra Pradesh

Rapolu Bhaskar Netha Vs The State of Telangana