IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD PRESENT THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE SANJAY KUMAR WRIT PETITION NO:17352 OF 2010 DATED:20.7.2010 Between: M/s Jaya Ganesh Traders .....PETITIONER AND The Commissioner & Director of Agriculture, Hyderabad & others. .....RESPONDENTs This Court made the following : THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE SANJAY KUMAR WRIT PETITION NO:17352 OF 2010 ORDER: The grievance of the petitioner is with regard to the inaction on the part of the Commissioner and Director of Agriculture, Hyderabad in disposing of his stay application/Appeal filed on 8.4.2010 against the order dated 2.3.2010 passed by the Assistant Director of Agriculture (R), Bantumilli Village and Mandal, Krishna District. By the order dated 2.3.2010, the petitioner’s licence was cancelled under Clause 31 of the Fertilizer (Control) Order, 1985. Aggrieved thereby, the petitioner approached this Court by way of W.P.No:7120 of 2010 which was disposed of by order dated 30.3.2010 granting liberty to the petitioner to avail the appellate remedy within two (2) Weeks. In consequence, the petitioner filed the appeal along with the stay application on 8.4.2010 before the Appellate Authority, the Commissioner and Director of Agriculture, Hyderabad. The cause of complaint presently is that in spite of arguments being advanced in the said appeal, no orders have been passed till date. The plea of the petitioner that the inaction on the Appellate Authority in this regard is reason enough for this Court to grant stay of the order under challenge pending disposal of such appeal, cannot be countenanced. As pointed out by the Supreme Court in ASSISTANT COLLECTOR OF CENTRAL EXCISE, CHANDANNAGAR VS. DUNLOP INDIA LIMITED ([1]), Article 226 is not intended to be used to circumvent statutory remedies. It is not for this Court to provide interim protection to the party pending the appeal on the file of the statutory authority. It is for the petitioner to agitate his stay/suspension application before such authority and seek interim orders pending disposal of the main appeal. Needless to state, such authorities are required to be prompt in discharge of their quasi judicial duties under the statute so that parties are given timely protection. Delay on the part of statutory authorities in disposing of stay applications not only engenders futility of adjudication in some cases but also causes general distrust in the system. Such situations need to be avoided. The writ petition is accordingly disposed of directing the Appellate Authority to pass orders in the Stay application or in the Appeal, as the situation warrants, after giving an opportunity of hearing to the parties, within Ten (10) days from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. There shall be no order as to the costs. _________________ Justice Sanjay Kumar gurc Date:20.7.2010. THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE SANJAY KUMAR WRIT PETITION NO:17352 OF 2010 20th JULY, 2010 [1] (AIR 1985, SC 330)