IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction) MONDAY, THE EIGHTH DAY OF SEPTEMBER TWO THOUSAND AND EIGHT PRESENT THE HON'BLE MS JUSTICE G.ROHINI WRIT PETITION NO : 19420 of 2008 Between: M/s. GULFAROSH AGENCIES, rep. by its Proprietor, G.Nadeemulla, S/o. G.C.Sheik Sab R/o. Guntakal Town, Ananthapur District. ..... PETITIONER AND 1 The Commissioner of Civil Supplies, A.P., Hyderabad. 2 The Joint Collector ( Civil Supplies), Ananthapur. 3 The district & Sessions Judge, Ananthapur. 4 The Inspector of Police, Vigilance ( Enft), Ananthapur. .....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 a Writ of Mandamus or any other appropriate writ or Writs, order or direction, declaring the order dt. 28.6.2008 in CCS Progs.No. E2/5371/2008 on the ﬁle of the ﬁrst respondent and the proceedings dt. 11.6.2008 in Proc.No. K2/73/2007 on the ﬁle of the 2nd respondent herein, as illegal, arbitrary, unconstitutional, without jurisdiction and violative of principles of natural justice by consequently directing the 2nd respondent not to cancel the licence of the petitioner till appeal ﬁled by petitioner before the ﬁrst respondent and the 6-A proceedings pending before the 3rd respondent are finally decided; Award costs. Counsel for the Petitioner: MR.N.RANGA REDDY Counsel for the Respondent No.: GP FOR CIVIL SUPPLIES The Court made the following : THE HON’BLE Ms. JUSTICE G. ROHINI WRIT PETITION No. 19420 of 2008 O R D E R: This writ petition is ﬁled seeking a declaration that the order dated 28-06-2008 passed by the ﬁrst respondent-Commissioner of Civil Supplies, dismissing the application ﬁled by the petitioner for stay, pending disposal of its appeal against the order of the second respondent, dated 11-06-2008, is arbitrary and illegal. A perusal of the material on record shows that the second respondent, vide order, dated 11-06-2008, cancelled the Form-B licence of the petitioner under clause 28(1) of the A.P. Petroleum Products (Licence and Regulation for Supply) Order, 1980. Against the said order, the petitioner ﬁled an appeal before the ﬁrst respondent. Though the appeal was entertained, the ﬁrst respondent while observing that no prima facie case was made out for granting stay, dismissed the application ﬁled by the petitioner for suspension of the order of cancellation dated 11-06-2008. Hence, this writ petition. Having heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned Government Pleader for Civil Supplies appearing for the respondents, though I do not ﬁnd any justiﬁable reason to interfere with the order under challenge, I deem it appropriate to dispose of the writ petition with a direction to the ﬁrst respondent to dispose of the main appeal itself as expeditiously as possible preferably within a period of four weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order after giving an opportunity of hearing to the petitioner and after considering all the contentions raised by the petitioner in the memorandum of ground. The writ petition is accordingly disposed of. No costs. ______________ G. ROHINI,J Date: 08-09-2008 Note: Issue C.C, in 3 days. B/o KLP