High Court for State of TelanganaWP/31821/2015disposed of no costs

Smt. Keesari Susheela W/O Narsaiah, v. The State Of Telangana, Rep. By Its Principal Secretary,

2015-09-30Vilas V.Afzulpurkar3 pages

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT HYDERABAD

FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA & THE STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH * * * WRIT PETITION No. 31821 of 2015 BETWEEN Keesari Susheela ... PETITIONER AND The State of Telangana, rep. by its Principal Secretary and others ...RESPONDENTS Date of Order pronounced: 30.09.2015 THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE VILAS V. AFZULPURKAR

1. Whether Reporters of Local newspapers Yes/No may be allowed to see the Judgments?

2. Whether the copies of judgment may be Yes/No marked to Law Reporters/Journals?

3. Whether his Lordship wish to see the Yes/No fair copy of the Judgment?

ORDER:- Heard.

2. Petitioner questions the order of the Revenue Divisional Officer (RDO), Macherial vide Proc.Rc.No.G/2403/2004 dated 17.04.2015 whereunder the RDO considered the report of the Tahsildar and directed the Tahsildar to take necessary action and submit proposal for cancellation of irregular assignment said to have been made in favour of the petitioner.

3. Learned counsel for the petitioner states that it is neither discernable from the order as to which provision of law is invoked by the RDO in passing the aforesaid order nor the petitioner is served with any alleged appeal said to have been filed by the fifth respondent. Learned counsel submits that there is no irregularity in the assignment made to the petitioner and, as such, the very direction issued by the RDO inviting proposal for cancellation issued by the MRO is unjustified.

4. It is evident that the impugned order passed by the RDO is amenable to appeal/revisional jurisdiction and if the petitioner seeks to contend that there is no irregularity in the said assignment warranting cancellation, she can do so by approaching the appropriate authority. I do not see any reason to entertain the writ petition bypassing the remedies available to the petitioner. Hence, with the liberty to the petitioner to approach the appropriate authority, writ petition is dismissed. As a sequel, the miscellaneous applications, if any, shall stand closed. There shall be no order as to costs.

_____________________ VILAS V. AFZULPURKAR, J September 30, 2015 LMV