Smt. K. Narayanamma v. District
Case at a glance
- Decided
- 31 Aug 2004
- Bench
- G ROHINI
Outcome
Disposed of
petition is disposed of with a direction to the first respondent to consider the appeal
Provisions considered
- Constitution of India art. 226
Key paragraphs
- Para 44 . Accordingly, the impugned order, dated 18.08.2004 is set aside and the writ petition is disposed of with a direction to the first respondent to consider the appeal afresh and pass appropriate orders in accordance with law after affording due opportunity to the petitioner…
- Para 55. The writ petition is accordingly disposed of. No costs. __________________ 31st August, 2004 To: 1 The Joint Collector, Anantapur 2 The Revenue Divisional Officer, Penukonda, Anantapur District 3 The Mandal Revenue Officer, Amadagur Mandal, Anantapur District. 4 Two CCs to the Government Pleader for…
Judgment
Cause title
Smt. K. Narayanamma W/o K. Rangaramappa r/o Kandakurivaripalli H/o Joukalakothapalli Village Amadagur Mandal, Anantapur District AND ..... PETITIONER
1 The Joint Collector, Anantapur 2 The Revenue Divisional Officer, Penukonda, Anantapur District 3 The Mandal Revenue Officer, Amadagur Mandal, Anantapur District. .....RESPONDENTS
Petition under Article 226 of the constitution of India praying that in the circumstances stated in the Affidavit filed herein the High Court will be pleased to issue Writ of Mandamus or any other appropriate Writ or direction declaring the order of the 1st respondent passed in D. Dis. NO. K4/PKD/920/2004 dated 18-8-2004 confirming the order of the 2nd respondent passed in Rc. NO. 1062/2004 dated 3-7- 2004 as illegal arbitrary and contrary to the provisions of the Control order and consequently direct the respondents to permit the petitioner to distribute essential commodities. Counsel for the Petitioner: MR.O.MANOHER REDDY Counsel for the Respondent Nos.1to3: GP FOR CIVIL SUPPLIES The Court made the following :
ORAL ORDER:
The petitioner is the authorized dealer in respect of the fair price shop of Joukalakothapalli village, Amadagur Mandal, Anantapur District. Her authorization was suspended pending enquiry into the alleged irregularities in distribution of commodities vide proceedings of the Revenue Divisional Officer, dated 3.7.2004. Aggrieved by the same, the petitioner preferred an appeal before the first respondent-Joint Collector, Anantapur. Said appeal was dismissed by the first respondent by an order, dated 18.08.2004 and the Revenue Divisional Officer was directed to proceed as per the provisions of the APSPD System (Control) Order,
2001. Challenging the said order, this writ petition is filed.
Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned Government Pleader for Civil Supplies and perused the material on record.
As can be seen from the record, the first respondent passed the impugned order without affording any opportunity to the petitioner/appellant and without assigning any reasons in support of his conclusion. The first respondent being the competent authority to hear the statutory appeal, is expected to consider the merits of the case, particularly the question whether the suspension of authorization is warranted in the facts and circumstances of the case and ought to have recorded a finding to that effect. The impugned order which is cryptic and appears to have been passed mechanically without considering the nature of the allegations against the petitioner cannot be sustained and the matter requires reconsideration.
Operative part
Accordingly, the impugned order, dated 18.08.2004 is set aside and the writ petition is disposed of with a direction to the first respondent to consider the appeal afresh and pass appropriate orders in accordance with law after affording due opportunity to the petitioner as expeditiously as possible, preferably, within a period of three weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order.
The writ petition is accordingly disposed of. No costs. __________________ 31st August, 2004 To: 1 The Joint Collector, Anantapur 2 The Revenue Divisional Officer, Penukonda, Anantapur District 3 The Mandal Revenue Officer, Amadagur Mandal, Anantapur District. 4 Two CCs to the Government Pleader for Civil Supplies, High Court Building, Hyderabad. (OUT) 5 Two C.D. copies. sj/gbs
Questions this judgment answers
What did the Court decide in this case?
The Court recorded the following disposition: petition is disposed of with a direction to the first respondent to consider the appeal
Which statutory provisions did this judgment involve?
Constitution of India — art. 226.
Which court decided this case, and when?
Andhra Pradesh High Court, on 31 Aug 2004. The bench was G ROHINI.
Precedent status how later indexed judgments have treated this case
No known negative treatment found in the Courts & Cases corpus.
This is a result about the indexed corpus, not a finding that the judgment remains good law. Coverage may be incomplete.