IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction) THURSDAY, THE ELEVENTH DAY OF DECEMBER TWO THOUSAND AND EIGHT PRESENT THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE C.V.RAMULU WRIT PETITION NO : 26095 of 2008 Between: Katkuri Ganna Reddy, S/o. K. Ramakrishna Reddy, R/o. House No. 1-2-151, KK Road, Suryapt, Nalgonda District. ..... PETITIONER AND 1 The Government of Andhra Pradesh, Market Committees, Tankbund, Hyderabad. 2 The Commissioner & Director Market Committees Burgual Ramakrishna Rao Bhavan, Tank Bund, Hyderabad. 3 The Secretary, Agricultural Market Committee, at Suryapet .....RESPONDENT(S) 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 or order/s more particularly one in the nature of Writ of Mandamus declaring the action of first respondent in not extending the term of Agricultural Market Committee, Suryapet, Nalgonda District constituted vide GO Ms.No. 450 dated 18-11-2005, pursuant to the representation dated 17-11-2008 submitted by the petitioner, as being arbitrary and unconstitutional, and consequently direct the first respondent to extend the term of Chairman, Agricultural Market Committee, Suryapet, Nalgonda District for a period of six months. Counsel for the Petitioner:MR.B.VIJAYSEN REDDY Counsel for the Respondent No.: GP FOR COOPERATION The Court made the following : THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE C.V. RAMULU W.P. No. 26095 of 2008 O R D E R: It is the case of the petitioner that he was nominated as the Chairman of the Market Committee for a period of three years. However, in the meanwhile, he was illegally removed from the office. Aggrieved by the same, he filed a writ petition before this Court. The said writ petition was dismissed. However, the writ appeal filed by the petitioner was allowed. Aggrieved by the same, the impleaded respondent carried the matter to the Supreme Court. The Supreme Court dismissed the same at the threshold. Thus, according to the petitioner, it must be deemed that he is in office without any interruption. Now, the grievance of the petitioner is that as per G.O.Ms.No.450 dated 18.11.2005, when the term has expired, the Government is entitled to consider extension of the term of the existing committee. Under those circumstances, a representation dated 17.11.2008 was filed by the petitioner before 1st respondent, but the said representation is still pending. While admitting the writ petition, an interim direction was given to 1st respondent to consider the case of the petitioner in continuing him as the Chairman of the Agricultural Market Committee, Suryapet, Nalgonda District, as per the Rules and if such cases have been considered by other Market Committees in the State and pass appropriate orders within a period of three weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of that order. Now, the impleaded respondent, who was unsuccessful before the Supreme Court in the earlier round of litigation, filed counter. In the facts and circumstances of the case, I deem it appropriate to dispose of the writ petition directing the 1st respondent to consider the representation purported to have been made by the petitioner on 17.11.2008 for extending his term as the Chairman of the Agricultural Market Committee, Suryapet, Nalgonda District, in the light of G.O.Ms.No.450 dated 18.11.2005, if such cases have been considered by the respondents in respect of other market committees in the State, and pass appropriate orders as per law, within a period of two weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. The writ petition is accordingly disposed of. No order as to costs. C.V. RAMULU, J. Date: 11-12-2008. MVB.