IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction) THURSDAY, THE EIGHTEENTH DAY OF DECEMBER TWO THOUSAND AND EIGHT PRESENT HON'BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE SRI ANIL R. DAVE and HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE R.SUBHASH REDDY WRIT PETITION No.22477 of 2008 Between: K. Maanasa, D/o. K.G.K. Prasad, aged about 22 years, Occ: Student of final MBBS, R/o. #504, Sri Durga Harmony, H.No.6-3-552/1, Erramanzil Colony, Hyderabad – 500 082. ... PETITIONER AND 1 A.P. State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission Rep. by its Registrar, Eruvaka Bhavan, Khairatabad, Hyderabad. 2 M/s. Orange Auto Ltd. Rep. by its Managing Director Road No.1, Banjara Hills, Hyderabad. 3 Mr. Ranga Rao S/o. not known Road No.1, Banjara Hills, Hyderabad. 4 The Station House Officer Panjagutta Police Station Panjagutta, Hyderabad. (Respondents No.2 to 4 are not necessary parties since the Appeal was dismissed at the admission stage without issuing notice to the Opp. parties) ...RESPONDENTS Petition under Article 226 of the constitution of India praying that in the circumstances stated in the Affidavit filed herein the High Court may be pleased to issue a writ, order or direction more in the nature of a Writ of Certiorari, by calling for records relating to and in connection with the passing of the order dated 31-07-2008 by the 1st respondent in F.A.I.A. No.1461 of 2006 and F.A. Sr.No.2541 of 2006 as arbitrary, illegal and violative of the established practice and procedure and consequentially set aside the same with a direction to the 1st Respondent to restore F.A.Sr.No.2541 of 2006 to its file for trying the same along with F.A. No.576 of 2006. Counsel for the Petitioner: MR. P.V.S.S.S. Rama Rao Counsel for Respondent No.1: GP, Civil Supplies Counsel for Respondent No.2: Mr. V.V. Prabhakar Rao Counsel for Respondent No.4: GP, Home The Court made the following: Order: (Per Hon’ble Sri Anil R. Dave, CJ) Being aggrieved by an order dated 31-07-2008 passed by the A.P. State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission in F.A.I.A.No.1461 of 2006 in F.A.Sr.No.2541 of 2006 against C.C.No.992 of 2005, this appeal has been filed. On 11-12-2008, though served nobody had appeared for respondents 2 and 3, and, therefore, hearing had been adjourned to 18-12-2008, i.e. today. Even today, nobody has appeared for the said respondents, and, therefore, the petition is taken up for hearing. Grievance, which has been ventilated in this petition is with regard to dismissal of F.A.I.A.No.1461 of 2006 referred to hereinabove, by order dated 31-07-2008. The afore-stated order passed by the Commission was an ex parte order. Somehow, the learned advocate appearing for the present petitioner could not remain present before the Commission, and, therefore, in the absence of the counsel appearing for the petitioner, the order was passed. Looking to the fact that the impugned order was passed without considering the case of the present petitioner, in the interest of justice, we quash and set aside the impugned order. A sum of Rs.2,500/- has been deposited by the petitioner by way of costs with this court. The said amount is directed to be withdrawn by respondents 2 and 3 in equal proportion as and when applications are submitted to the Registry of this court, by an A/c. payee cheque, upon identification by an Advocate. In view of the fact that the impugned order has been set aside, the Commission shall hear the afore-stated case de novo and shall decide the same at an early date. The petition, therefore, stands disposed of as allowed without any order as to costs. _______________ ANIL R. DAVE. _______________________ R. SUBHASH REDDY, J. December 18, 2008 MRR