IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction) MONDAY, THE TWELFTH DAY OF APRIL, TWO THOUSAND TEN PRESENT: THE HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE C.V.NAGARJUNA REDDY WRIT PETITION No.28103 of 2009 Between: K. Srinivasa Rao … Petitioner And The Revenue Divisional Forest Officer, Giddalur, Prakasam District & another. … Respondents Counsel for the petitioner: Sri S.V. Ramana Counsel for the respondents: GP for Forests This Court made the following: THE HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE C.V.NAGARJUNA REDDY WRIT PETITION No.28103 of 2009 ORDER:- At the interlocutory stage, the writ petition is taken up for hearing and disposal with the consent of the learned counsel for the parties. The petitioner is the proprietor of V.L. Enterprises Timber Depot and Pulpwood Supplier at Ongole. He filed this writ petition questioning the action of respondent No.2 in sealing his business premises. At the hearing, it is represented by the learned Government Pleader for Forests that in view of several irregularities that were noticed, the petitioner’s business premises was seized and show cause notice dated 12.12.2009 has been issued calling upon the petitioner to submit his explanation within seven days. The learned Government Pleader further submitted that instead of submitting his explanation, the petitioner filed the present writ petition. The learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that while there can be no objection for the petitioner to submit his explanation, the respondents ought not to have sealed his business premises. He pointed out that this Court, by order dated 28.01.2010, granted interim stay of all further proceedings in pursuance of the show cause notice. In my considered opinion, the petitioner is required to submit his explanation to the show cause notice issued by the respondents. In the absence of any order, the respondents are not entitled to seal the business premises of the petitioner. The writ petition is therefore disposed of with the direction to the respondents to permit the petitioner to carry on the business so long as the licence issued in his favour remains intact. The petitioner shall file his explanation within a period of three weeks from today and on receipt of such explanation, respondent No.1 shall pass appropriate order thereon and communicate the same to the petitioner. Till passing of such an order, the respondents shall not interfere with the petitioner’s business unless he is found to have committed any illegalities or irregularities in future. As a sequel to disposal of the writ petition, WPMP.Nos.36609 and 36610 of 2009 and WVMP.No.1065 of 2010 are disposed of as infructuous. _____________________________ C.V. NAGARJUNA REDDY, J Date: 12.04.2010 ES