IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction) SATURDAY, THE FIFTH DAY OF NOVEMBER, TWO THOUSAND AND ELEVEN PRESENT: THE HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE C.V.NAGARJUNA REDDY WRIT PETITION No.11909 of 2011 Between: M/s. T.J. Cellulose (P) Limited Chittoor. … Petitioner And The Commissioner of Prohibition & Excise Hyderabad. … Respondent Counsel for the petitioner: Sri S. Ravi, Senior Counsel for Sri Ch. Pushyam Kiran Counsel for the respondent: GP for Prohibition & Excise This Court made the following: THE HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE C.V.NAGARJUNA REDDY WRIT PETITION No.11909 of 2011 ORDER:- This Writ Petition is filed for a Certiorari to quash Cr.No.10865/2008/CPE/B1(1), dated 29.10.2009, of the respondent, whereby he has kept the petitioner’s RS-III licence under suspension, pending passing of final order of cancellation. Subsequent to the passing of the impugned order of suspension, the petitioner’s licence was cancelled by proceedings, dated 08.03.2010, which were assailed in Writ Petition No.8655 of 2010. The said Writ Petition came to be allowed by order, dated 16.06.2010, on the short ground that the copy of the enquiry report, based on which the petitioner’s licence was cancelled, was not supplied to the petitioner. Even though substantial time has elapsed, the respondent has not passed a fresh order in terms of the direction given by this Court in the said Writ Petition. The petitioner has therefore filed the present Writ Petition for quashing the order of suspension passed prior to the order terminating its licence. At the hearing, Sri S. Ravi, learned Senior counsel appearing for the petitioner, submitted that the respondent cannot keep the proceedings pending for unduly long time denying the petitioner of its right to run the industry on the basis of the suspension order passed as far back as 29.10.2009. The learned Government Pleader for Prohibition and Excise submitted that since the post of Assistant Commissioner of Excise, from whom the Commissioner called for a report, was vacant for a long time, the final order could not be passed. He assures that the respondent will pass a final order within three weeks from today. In my opinion, as the order of suspension was passed prior to the passing of the termination order and much time has elapsed since then, it is not expedient to set aside the order of suspension at this stage. In the light of the undertaking given by the learned Government Pleader, the Writ Petition is disposed of with the direction to the respondent to pass a final order within a period of three weeks from today. As a sequel to disposal of the Writ Petition, WPMP.No.14566 of 2011 filed by the petitioner for interim relief is disposed of as infructuous. ____________________________ C.V.NAGARJUNA REDDY, J Date: 05.11.2011 ES