IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction) THURSDAY, THE THIRD DAY OF FEBRUARY TWO THOUSAND AND FIVE PRESENT THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE L.NARASIMHA REDDY WRIT PETITION NO : 1359 of 2005 Between: L. Ramesh Singh S/o Late Kishen Singh r/o 13-1-1238/1, Seetharambagh, Hyderabad ..... PETITIONER AND Chief Rationing Officer, Hyderabad .....RESPONDENT 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 direction declaring the inaction of the respondent in not disposing of the application dated 13-09-2004 file in the prescribed form "A" by the petitioner under the control order as bad, illegal, violative of Articles 14 and 19 (1)(g) of constitution of India and pass such other appropriate Order or orders. Counsel for the Petitioner:MR.T.JAGDISH Counsel for the Respondent : GP FOR CIVIL SUPPLIES The Court, at the stage of admission, made the following : ORAL ORDER: The petitioner was a partner in a firm by name M/s Vishal Enterprises. The other partner was, one Smt. R.S. Noorjahan Sultana. The Chief Rationing Officer, Hyderabad, issued a licence in favour of the firm under the Andhra Pradesh Petroleum Products (LRS) Order, 1980, for distribution of PDS Kerosine oil. Disputes arose between the parties and, ultimately, the firm itself stood dissolved. In that view of the matter, the licence in favour of the firm was not renewed. Certain proceedings ensued between the partners, both before this court as well as the respondent herein. The petitioner states that he submitted an explanation dated 13.9.2004, requesting the respondent to grant licence in his individual name since he continues to be a dealer of Indian Oil Corporation. His grievance is that no orders have been passed thereon, and seeks direction in this regard. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned Government Pleader for Civil Supplies. Learned Government Pleader for Civil Supplies has placed before this court copies of the order dated 17.3.2004 in W.P.No.13096 of 2002, and also the order dated 15.1.2005, passed by the respondent. The outcome of the said orders is that the licence in favour of the firm was not renewed, and the parties were required to settle their disputes. Now that the petitioner had submitted an application to grant licence in his name individually, the same needs to be considered in accordance with the relevant provisions of law. If there is any impediment in the matter of grant of licence in favour of the petitioner, the decision of the respondent needs to be communicated to the petitioner. There cannot be any justification in keeping the application pending, indefinitely. The writ petition is disposed of directing the respondent to pass appropriate orders on the application made by the petitioner on 13.9.2004, within a period of four weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. No order as to costs. 3.2.2005 Note: CC in three days. BO CVM To, 1. Chief Rationing Officer, Hyderabad, 2. 2 CCs to G.P. for Civil Supplies, High Court buildings, Hyderabad (OUT). 3. 2 CD copies.