Dismissed

M/s. Vasavi Parboiled Industries, v. Secy., Civil dept., State of T.S.

Telangana HC10 Nov 2023WP/16941/2018

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

High Court dismissed the writ petition filed by a rice industry proprietor and vehicle owner challenging the accused detention of stock and vehicle. Court observed non-appearance of petitioners and assigned other remedies.

What did the court decide?

Writ petition dismissed; liberty to question the final administrative order dated 13.06.2018 granted. No costs.

M/s. Vasavi Parboiled Industries, Vs… — Constitutional and Fundamental Rights | Telangana HC (2023)

¶1

[³³⁰³¹

¶2

HIGH COURT FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA AT HYDERABAD

¶3

(Special Original Jurisdiction)

¶4

FRIDAY,THE TENTH DAY OF NOVEMBER TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY THREE

¶5

PRESENT

¶6

THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE J SREENIVAS RAO

¶7

WRIT PETITION NO: 16941 OF 2018

¶8

Between:

¶9

M/s. Vasavi Parboiled lndustries, K.D.R. Nagar,^{Wanaparthy, Mahabubnagar} District, rep by its Proprietor, Sri. B. Nagender, S/o. B. Krishnaiah, Aged 58 Yea rs.

¶10

Mohammed Khaja Moinoddin, S/o. Mohammed^{Alabakash,Aged about 38} years, Fi./o. H.No. 25-106-2, Gandhi Nagar, Ward No.7, Wanaparthy, Mahabubnagar District. (Owner of the Vehicle bearing No.AP²² U 5052)

¶11

...PETITIONERS

¶12

AND

¶13

The State of Telangana, Rep.by its Secretary,^{Consumer Affairs Foodand} Civil Supplies Department, Secretariat,^Hyderabad

¶14

The Joint Collector, Mahabubnagar^{District at Mahabubnagar.}

¶15

The Tahsildar, Wanaparthy Mandal, fvlahabubnagar^District.

¶16

The Station House Officer, Wanaparthy,^{Ivlahabubnagar District.}

¶17

...RESPONDENTS

¶18

Petition under Article 226 ol lhe Constitution^{of lndia prayingthat in the} circumstances stated in the affidavit^{filed therewith, the High Court maybe} pleased to issue a writ, order or direction, more particularly one in the nature or writ of Mandamus, declaring the action of the 2nd^{respondentin not disposingof} the representation Dt. 30.04.2018 for release ol stock^{i.e., 12O bags of PDS rice} with each 35 KGs total 55^quintals and 34 bags of^{rice each 25 Kgs total8.50} quintals of rice in favour of the^'1st petitioner and also release the vehicle bearing No. AP 22 U 5052 in favour of the 2nd^{petitioneris illegal, arbitrary and violation} of principles of natural lustice and consequently direct^{the respondents2lo 4 lo} release of stock i.e., 120 bags of PDS rice with each^{35 KGstotal 55 quintals} and 34 bags of rice each 25 Kgs total 8.50^{quintals of rice of the 1st petitioner} and also release the vehicle bearing^{No. AP 22 U 5052 in favour of the 2nd} petitioner

¶19

¶20

lA NO: 1 OF 2018

¶21

Petition under Section^'1 51 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 respondents 2 to 4lo release of stock i.e., 120 bags of P[)S rice with each 35 KGs total 55 quintals and 34 bags of rice each 25 Kgs total B 50 quintals of rice of the 1st petitioner, pending disposal of the writ petition lA NO: 2 OF 2018

¶22

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 respondents 2 to 4 to release the vehicle bearing No. AP 2',1 U 5052 in favour of the 2nd petitioner, pending disposal of the writ petition

¶23

lA NO: 3 OF 2018

¶24

Between:

¶25

'1 . The State of Telangana, Rep.by its Secretary, Consumer Affairs; Food and Civil Supplies Department, Secretariat, Hyderabad

¶26

2- The Joint Collector, Mahabubnagar District at Mahabubnagar. 3- The Tahsildar, Wanaparthy Mandal, [Vlahabubnagar District.

¶27

...PETITIONERS/RESPONDENTS

¶28

AND

¶29

M/s. Vasavi Parboiled lndustries, K.D.R. Nagar, Wanaparthy, Mahabubnagar District, rep by its Proprietor, Sri. B. Nagender, S/o. B. Krishnaiah, Aged 58 Years.

¶30

a Mohammed Khaja Moinoddin, S/o. Mohammed Alabakash, Aged about 38 years, Ri/o. H.No. 25-'106-2, Gandhi Nagar, Ward No.7, W'anaparthy, Mahabubnagar District, (Owner of the Vehicle bearing No.AP 22 U 5052)

¶31

....RESPONDENTS/PEI ITIONERS

¶32

The Station House Officer, Wanaparthy, Mahabubnagar District.

¶33

....RESPONDENTS/RESPONDENTS

¶34

Petition under Section 151 CPC praying that in the circumstancer; stated in the affidavit filed in support of the petition, the High Court may be pleased to vacate the interim orders dated 20.06.2018 passed in lA No.2/2C 18/in Wp No.16941/2018 drsmiss the above writ petition

lA NO: 4 OF 2018

Between:

1 . The State of Telangana, Rep.by its Secretary, Consumer Affairs Food and Civil Supplies Department, Secretariat, Hyderabad

¶39

The Joint Collector, lvlahabubnagar District at Mahabubnagar.

¶40

The Tahsildar, Wanaparthy Mandal, Mahabubnagar District.

¶41

... PETITIONERS/RESPONDENTS

¶42

AND

¶43

M/s. Vasavi Parboiled lndustries, K.D.R. Nagar, Wanaparthy, Mahabubnagar Qistrict,^{rep by its Proprietor, Sri. B. Nagender, S/o. B. Krishnaiah,Aged 58} Years.

¶44

2 Mohammed Khaja Moinoddin, S/o. Mohammed Alabakash, Aged about 38 ygarsl Ryo. HNo. 25-106-2, Gandhi Nagar, Ward No.7, Wanaparthy, Mahabubnagar District. (Owner of the Vehicle bearing No.AP 22 U 5052)

¶45

...RESPONDENTS/PETITIONERS

¶46

The Station House Officer, Wanaparthy, Mahabubnagar District.

¶47

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 vacate the orders dated 20.06.2018 passed in lA No. 2/2018 in WP No.16941 of 2018 and dismiss the above writ petition

¶48

Counsel for the Petitioner: SRl. K. SRINIVAS

¶49

Counsel for the Respondent Nos. 1 to 3: GP FOR CIVIL SUPPLIES

¶50

Counsel for the Respondent No.4: GP FOR HOME

¶51

The Court made the following: ORDER

¶52

I \

¶53

HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE J. SREENIVAS RAO

¶54

WRIT PETITION No-1 6941 of 2o18

¶55

ORDER:

¶56

This writ petition is filed seeking following reliei

¶57

"...to issue a writ, order or direction more particularly one in the nature or writ of Martdamus declaring the action of the 2"d respondent in not disposing of the representation Dt.3O.O4.2Ol8 for release of stock i.e. 12O bags of pDS rice w.ith each 35 KGs total 55 quintals and 34 bags of rice each 25 Kgs total 8.5O quintals of rice in favour of the 1". petitioner and also release the vehicle bearing No.Ap 22 U 5052 in lavour of the 2"d petitioner is i1legal, arbitrary and violation of principles of natural justice and consequently direct the respondent Nos.2 to 4 to release of stock i.e., 120 bags of pDS rice with each 35 KGs total 55 quintals and 34 bags of rice each 25 Kgs total 8.5O quintals of rice of the l"t petitioner and also release Lhe vchiclc bearing No.AP 22 U 5OS2 in favour of the 2",i petitioner ...'

¶58

When the matter was taken up for heanng on 02.11.2023, there u,as no representation on behalf of the petitioner, to give one opportunity the matter was posted ro 09_ i 1.2023.

¶59

On O9. l1 .2023, also there was no representation on behalf of the petitioner, to give hnal opportunity the matter \4,.as postcd ro 10.1 L.2O23, under the capti,cn ,for dismissal'.

¶60

¶61

Toclay also there is^{no representationon behalf of} the petitioner in^{spite of the matterbeing listed under the} caption'for dismissal'.

¶62

Learned Assistant^{GovernmentPleader forCivil} Supplies, basing on^{the instructions furnishedby the} District Civil Supply^{Officer, Wanaparthy, sul-rmits that} prior to glanting the interim^{order by this Court on} 20.06.2O18 in I.A.No.1^{and 2 of 2018, respondentNo'2} passed final order on^{13.06.2O18 and after passingthe} said order, the^{petitionerapproachedthis Court and filed} the writ petition^{challengingthe said order and the same} is not maintainable^{under law.}

¶63

In view of the same,^{the writ petitionis dismissed'} However, the petitioner^{is granted liberty to avail thc} remedies as available under^{law including questioningthe} final order passed by respondent^{No'2 dated13'O6 '2Ola'} if so petitioner advised.^{No costs.}

¶64

As a sequel, miscellaneous^{petitions, pending if any'}

sha-u stand closed.

To,

SD/. K. VENKAIAH AsslsiANr^REGISTRAR I //TRUE coPY// .Ec.oti9dfFtcER^</sup>

¶69

Two CCs^{to GP FOR CIVIL SUPPLIES 'High Court for the State of} 2 i*:telti'Lt'CS6t'i3J?Y;lth^{court ror the Stateor reransana'at}

¶70

3 B'"1"6t?S^{t?YX. t*,*'uAs'AdvocatetoPUCl} 4 Two CD^CoPies BM

¶71

9, GJP

)

i (t

HIGH COURT

DATED:1011112023

ORDER

T L4
o
-t!
.i,$
4-r k
+- . c-) a
$J- i.'
dc
\ J
_f
i-J

¶78

WP.No.16941 of 2018

¶79

DtsMrssrNc THE WRIT^{PETITIOUWITHOUT COSTS}

¶80

qiil.\s

M/s. Vasavi Parboiled Industries, v. Secy., Civil dept., State of T.S.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

M/s. Vasavi Parboiled Industries, v. Secy., Civil dept., State of T.S.

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

Ms. K. Tirumlaleswari Vs Sri.I. Samuel Anand Kumar, IAS

P. Gunaseelan Vs The Dist. Panchayat Officer

M.M.Luther, Vs Chandra Mohan Reddy

Kola Srinivas Vs Allneni Ram Mohan Rao

M/s. Balaji Nutrients (P) Ltd. Vs The Agricultural Market Committee, Gaddiannaram

K. Veeresha Lingam Vs Mr. J. Pandu Naik