← Library
High Court for State of TelanganaWP/3898/2015disposed of no costs

J. Raj Kumar Yadav v. The State Of Telangana Rep. By Its Principal Secretary,

2015-02-20Vilas V.Afzulpurkar2 pages

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT HYDERABAD

FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA & THE STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH (Special Original Jurisdiction) FRIDAY, THE TWENTIETH DAY OF FEBRUARY TWO THOUSAND AND FIFTEEN PRESENT THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE VILAS V. AFZULPURKAR WRIT PETITION No.3898 of 2015 BETWEEN J.Raj Kumar Yadav ... PETITIONER AND The State of Telangana, Rep. by its Principal Secretary, Secretariat Building, Hyderabad and others.

...RESPONDENTS The Court made the following:

ORDER:

Heard.

2. Petitioner's A4 licence of Peddapur Village, Medak District, was cancelled by the Prohibition and Excise Superintendent, respondent No.3, vide impugned order, Ex.P1, dated 14.02.2015. The said order is clearly appealable.

3. Learned counsel for the petitioner contends that the impugned order is passed in violation of orders of this court in W.P.No.1056 of 2015 dated 27.01.2015 and also contends that the grounds, on which the cancellation order is passed, were not part of the allegations in the show cause notice and hence, petitioner has not replied to the said allegations.

4. Even assuming that both the said contentions are sustainable, petitioner has an efficacious alternative remedy of questioning the said impugned order by way of an appeal and the appellate authority can certainly examine the contentions of the petitioner and take appropriate decision in the matter. It is no doubt true that the period of licence is only one year and petitioner has already lost time on account of the suspension order already passed and further order of cancellation now passed.

5. Hence, the writ petition is disposed of relegating the petitioner to the said appellate remedy. If petitioner prefers appeal against the aforesaid order, the appellate authority is expected to deal with the said appeal, as expeditiously as possible, and dispose of the same, on merits, in accordance with law.

As a sequel, the miscellaneous applications, if any, shall stand closed. There shall be no order as to costs.

_____________________ VILAS V. AFZULPURKAR, J February 20, 2015 Note:-Furnish copy by 23.02.2015.

{B/o} Lmv