IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 26TH DAY OF APRIL 2019 BEFORE THE HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE ALOK ARADHE WRIT PETITION NO.17861 OF 2019 (GM-RES) BETWEEN:
M/S SRI ANJANEYA ROAD WORKS, HAVING ITS OFFICE AT H.NO.4-10, KANAGARTHI VILLAGE, ODELA MANDAL – 505152 PEDDAPALLI DISTRICT, TELANGANA STATE, REPRESENTED BY ITS PROPRIETOR/OCCUPIER, MR.DIDDY SURESH, AGED 25 YEARS, S/O THULASIDAS, R/AT H.NO.4-10, KANAGARTHI VILLAGE, ODELA MANDAL – 505152, PEDDAPALLI DISTRICT, TELANGANA STATE.
(BY MR.V.LAKSHMINARAYANA, SR.COUNSEL FOR MS.ANUSHA L, ADV.) AND:
1. THE UNION OF INDIA, DEPARTMNET OF MINISTY OF COMMERCE AND INDUSTRY REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY, NO.126, AZAD ROAD, UDYOG BHAVAN, DELHI – 110011.
2. THE CHIEF CONTROLLER OF EXPLOSIVES, C.G.O. COMPLEX, T.V.TOWER, SEMINARY HILLS, NAGPUR, MAHARASTRA – 440001.
… PETITIONER 3. THE JOINT CHIEF CONTROLLER OF EXPLOSIVES, SOUTH CIRCLE, A & D WING, BLOCK -1-8. IIND FLOOR, SHASTRI BHAVAN, 26 HODDOUS ROAD, NUNGAMBAKKAM, CHENNAI – 600006.
4. THE DEPUTY CHIEF CONTROLLER OF EXPLOSIVES, 2ND FLOOR, CITY CENTRE, OPP: HOTEL ROOPA, BALMATTA ROAD, MANGALORE – 575001.
(ASG SERVED) - - -
… RESPONDENTS THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLE 226 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA, PRAYING TO QUASH THE ORDER OF SUSPENSION PASSED BY THE R-3 AND 4 AS PER ANEXURE-H AND K BY ISSUE OF WRIT OF CERTIORARI, ALTERNATIVELY PERMIT THE APPELLANT TO RE-PRESENT THE APPEAL WHICH WAS PRESENTED ON 3.4.2019 AS PER ANNEXURE-L AND DIRECT THE APPELLATE AUTHOTITY TO DISPOSE OF THE APPEAL ON MERIT MEANWHILE BY GRANTING STY OF THE ORDERS, AND ETC.
THIS WRIT PETITION COMING ON FOR ORDERS THIS DAY, THE COURT MADE THE FOLLOWING:-
ORDER Sri.V.Lakshminarayana, learned Senior counsel for Ms.Anusha L., learned counsel for the petitioner.
Taking into account the order which this Court proposes to pass, it is not necessary to issue notice to the respondents.
2. The petition is admitted for hearing. With consent of the learned counsel for the parties, the same is heard finally.
3. In this petition, the petitioner inter alia seeks quashment of the order of suspension dated 31.12.2018.
4. When the matter was taken up today, learned Senior counsel for the petitioner fairly submitted that being aggrieved, the petitioner has preferred an appeal on 03.04.2019 before the respondent No.2. However, no decision on the appeal has been taken. It is further submitted that the petitioner be granted liberty to file an application for stay before the Appellate Authority and the Appellate Authority be directed to decide the application for stay in a time bound manner.
5. In view of the aforesaid submissions and in the facts of the case, the petition is disposed of with a direction that if the petitioner files an application for stay in the pending appeal before the Appellate Authority, the said application shall be decided by the Appellate Authority by a speaking order after affording an opportunity of hearing to the parties within two weeks from the date of filing of such application. The Appellate Authority shall make an endeavour to decide the appeal which has been filed by the petitioner within a period of three months from the date of receipt of certified copy of the order passed today.
Sd/- JUDGE RV