Yakkanti Srinivasa Reddy, v. The Union Of India,

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT HYDERABAD

FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA & THE STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH (Special Original Jurisdiction) TUESDAY, THE TWENTIETH DAY OF JANUARY TWO THOUSAND AND FIFTEEN PRESENT THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE VILAS V. AFZULPURKAR WRIT PETITION No.41042 of 2014 BETWEEN M.K.Enterprises, rep. by its Proprietor ... PETITIONER AND The Union of India and others ...RESPONDENTS The Court made the following:

ORDER:

Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned Assistant Solicitor General.

2. The grievance of the petitioner in this writ petition is with regard to the pendency of the revision petition filed by the petitioner before respondent No.1, which is stated to be pending since 14.07.2014. Petitioner states that the very demand notice No.1634/ML/MDK/2013 dated 30.05.2014 is the subject matter of the said revision and in view of the mining operations having come to a stand still, it is necessary that the said revision petition or at least the interlocutory application filed therein is heard and disposed of at an early date.

3. Learned Assistant Solicitor General submits that appropriate time be fixed to enable respondent No.1 to consider and dispose of the revision itself preferably within a period of two months.

4. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case and since the petitioner's revision is pending from more than six months, I deem it appropriate to dispose of the writ petition by directing respondent No.1 to consider and decide the said revision petition, in accordance with law, within two months from the date of receipt of a copy of this order.

With the above direction, the writ petition is disposed of. As a sequel, the miscellaneous applications, if any, shall stand closed. There shall be no order as to costs.

_____________________ VILAS V. AFZULPURKAR, J January 20, 2015 LMV