IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction) THURSDAY, THE ELEVENTH DAY OF SEPTEMBER TWO THOUSAND AND EIGHT PRESENT THE HON'BLE MS JUSTICE G.ROHINI WRIT PETITION NO : 19800 of 2008 Between: Y.Chenna Reddy S/o.Y Chenna Reddy Yenuguvaripalli(V) Pendimarry(M) Kadapa District ..... PETITIONER AND 1 The Govt of A.P rep.by its Secretary Prohibition and Excise Dept Secretariat Buildings Hyderabad 2 The Commissioner of Prohibition and Excise Dept Nampally, Hyderabad 3 The Prohibition and Excise Superintendent Proddatur, Kadapa District 4 The Prohibition & Excise Inspector Proddatur,Kadapa District .....RESPONDENTS Petition under Article 226 of the constitution of India praying that in the circumstances stated in the Aﬃdavit ﬁled herein the High Court will be pleased to issue an order or direction more particularly one in the nature of writ of Mandamus declaring the action of the 2nd respondent in not taking any steps on the recommendations made by the 3rd respondent vide proceedings in Rc No.B2/704/2006 dt 29-04-2008 for refunding the amount for 42 days ie from 01-03-08 to 12- 04-08 as illegal arbitrary and consequently direct the 2nd respondent to refund the amount for 42 days ie from 01-03-08 to 12-04-08. Counsel for the Petitioner: MR.K.RATHANGA PANI REDDY Counsel for the Respondent No.: GP FOR PROHIBITION & EXCISE The Court made the following : THE HON’BLE Ms. JUSTICE G. ROHINI WRIT PETITION No. 19800 of 2008 O R D E R: This writ petition is filed seeking a declaration that the action of the 2nd respondent-Commissioner of Prohibition and Excise in not taking any steps on the recommendations made by the 3rd respondent- Prohibition and Excise Superintendent, Proddatur dated 29-04-2008 for refunding the amount to the petitioner towards lease amount for 42 days i.e. from 01-03-2008 to 12-04-2008 is arbitrary and illegal. Having heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned Government Pleader for Prohibition and Excise appearing for the respondents and having regard to the fact that the petitioner’s representation is pending before the 2nd respondent, without expressing any opinion on merits, the writ petition is disposed of with a direction to the 2nd respondent to take appropriate decision taking into consideration the report submitted by the 3rd respondent, as expeditiously as possible, preferably within a period of four weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. No costs. ______________ G. ROHINI,J Date: 11-09-2008 KLP