S.Janga Reddy v. The Agricultural Market Committee
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT HYDERABAD
FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA AND THE STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH [Special Original Jurisdiction] THURSDAY THE SEVENTEENTH DAY OF MARCH TWO THOUSAND AND SIXTEEN PRESENT HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE S.V. BHATT Between:
S. Janga Reddy & Ors. ... Petitioners V/s.
The Agricultural Market Committee, LB Nagar Gaddiannaram Rep.by its Secretary & Ors. ... Respondents Counsel for the Petitioner : Sri B. Sasibhushan Rao Counsel for the Respondents: Smt. G.Neeraja Reddy Sri K.Goverdhan Reddy The Court made the following: [order follows] HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE S.V. BHATT
O R D E R :
The petitioners pray for the following relief: To issue appropriate order or direction more particularly one in the nature of writ of mandamus, declaring the inaction of the first respondent under Rule 48 of A.P. [Agricultural Produce & Livestock] Market Rules, 1969 for carry on business in vegetables in view of bifurcation of Agricultural Market Committee's and non-renewal the licence of the petitioners and considerations of 54 Commission agents for allotment of space in Gaddiannaram Agriculture Market Committee at LB Nagar in G.O. Rt.No. 426 Agriculture & Co-operation [AM-II] Department dated 01/4/2010 as illegal, arbitrary, in violative of the A.P. [Agricultural Produce & Livestock] Markets Act, 1966 and Rule 48 of A.P.
[Agricultural Produce & Livestock]Market Rules, 1969 and consequently to direct the first respondent to take appropriate action under /Rule 48 of A.P. [Agricultural Produce & Livestock] Market Rules, 1969 for carry on business in vegetables in view of bifurcation of Agricultural Market Committee and renewal of licence of the petitioners and direct the respondent to consider the case of the petitioners for allotment of space in Gadiannaram Agriculture Market Committee at LB Nagar in accordance with A.P. [Agricultural Produce & Livestock] Market Act, 1966 and Rule 48 of A.P. [Agricultural Produce & Livestock] Market Rules, 1969.
2. The substantial grievance in the writ prayer is against the inaction in disposing of the representation dated 30/4/2010 alleged to have been made by the petitioners to respondents.
3. I have perused the affidavit and counter-affidavit filed in the writ petition and I am of the view that instead of considering the merits of the case canvassed by the petitioners the
representation said to have been filed on 30/4/2010 can be directed to be disposed of by the respondents.
4. Accordingly, the writ petition is disposed of, directing the respondents to consider and dispose of the representation dated 30/4/2010 within three months from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. The petitioners are given liberty to communicate a copy of this order along with copy of representation dated 30/4/2010 to the respondents for timely action.
5. The writ petition is disposed of. No costs.
3. As a sequel, miscellaneous petitions if any, pending in this writ petition shall stand closed.
__________________ JUSTICE S.V. BHATT 17/03/2016 I s L HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE S.V. BHATT
Date: 17/03/2016 Circulation No.
Court Master: I s L