THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE A.V. SESHA SAI W.P.No.2574 of 2006 Between:
1. 1. Md. Sofi and others.
PETITIONERS AND
1. The Executive Officer, Secunderabad Cantonment, Secunderabad, and others.
RESPONDENTS ORDER:
This writ petition, filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, challenges the notice Eb/Sy.No.67 & 69/IAL CHS/863/14, dated 03.01.2006, issued by the Executive Officer, Secunderabad Cantonment, the 1st respondent.
2. Heard Sri K. Venugopal Reddy, learned counsel for the petitioners and Sri K. Ramakanth Reddy, learned counsel for the respondents 2 and 3
3. The 1st respondent issued the impugned notice, calling upon the petitioners as to why action should not be taken against them under the provisions of the Cantonment Act, 1924. In fact, the petitioners, in response to the said show cause notice, submitted explanation dated 7.02.2006, justifying their conduct. Even though a number of averments have been made in the affidavit filed in support of the implead petitions, filed by the third parties, this Court does not propose to go into all the factual controversies in view of the nature of the controversy involved in the present writ petition.
4. As the petitioner had already submitted explanation as long back as on 7.02.2006 in response to the show cause notice, this Court deems it appropriate to dispose of the writ petition with a direction to the 1st respondent to consider the said explanation submitted by the petitioners and to take appropriate action in accordance with law.
5. For the aforesaid reasons, the writ petition is disposed of directing the 1st respondent to consider the explanation dated 7.02.2006 submitted by the petitioners in response to the impugned notice Eb/Sy.No.67 & 69/IAL CHS/863/14, dated 03.01.2006. Pending consideration of the said explanation, interim order dated 17.02.2006 shall continue to operate. No order as to costs.
JUSTICE A.V. SESHA SAI.
24th September, 2014 Js.