HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE A. RAMALINGESWARA RAO WRIT PETITION No. 5972 of 2007 DATED 18TH SEP, 2014.
BETWEEN M/s. Trident Sugars Ltd., Madhunagar, Zaheerabad, Medak District, Rep. by its Director Mr. R.Varadaraj and anr …..Petitioners and The Cane Commissioner and Director of Sugar, Andhra Pradesh, Hyderabad and ors,.
…Respondents.
HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE A. RAMALINGESWARA RAO WRIT PETITION No. 5972 of 2007
ORDER:
Heard the learned Counsel for the petitioners, learned Government Pleader for Respondents 1 and 2 and learned Standing Counsel for Respondent No.3.
This Writ Petition was filed challenging the action of first and second respondents in refusing to make permanent allotment of four mandals, namely Manoor, Narayankhed, Kalher and Kangti of Madak District; to set aside the orders of the first respondent dated 10.11.2006 and 08.09.2005 in so far as they relate to the aforesaid four mandals and to direct the first respondent to allot the aforesaid four mandals to the petitioner’s zone on permanent basis by deleting from the third respondent’s zone.
From a reading of the impugned order, it is axiomatic that the Cane Commissioner and Director of Sugar, Andhra Pradesh, first respondent herein, passed the impugned orders allotting the aforesaid four mandals in the Medak Reddy District to the third respondent-sugar factory on temporary basis.
Now it is stated by the learned Counsel appearing on both sides that the period of allotment of the aforesaid mandals is expired and fresh consideration is to be done by the first respondent. It is submitted by the learned Counsel for the petitioners that as against the impugned orders, the first petitioner preferred an appeal and the appellate authority rejected the same on the ground that the present Writ Petition is pending adjudication.
In view of the expiry of the period mentioned in the impugned orders and further in view of necessity of the petitioner to file fresh application seeking to renew its request, nothing remains to be adjudicated in the Writ Petition and therefore the Writ Petition is liable to be dismissed as infructuous.
Accordingly the Writ Petition is dismissed as having become infructuous. However, liberty is given to the petitioner to make fresh application for the forthcoming period and if such an application is filed, the first respondent shall consider the same in the light of the provisions under the A.P. Sugarcane (Regulation of Supply and Purchase) Act, 1961 and rules made thereunder.
Miscellaneous petitions pending consideration if any I the Writ Petition shall stand closed. No order as to costs.
JUSTICE A. RAMALINGESWARA RAO DATED 18TH SEPTEMBER, 2014.
Msnro