F.A.No.477/2010 against  P.P.No.55/2005 in C.D.No.10/2005 , District Forum-I, Krishna at Machilipatnam.

Between:

1. The Assistant Divisional Engineer (Operation)

    APSPDCL., Machilipatnam.

2. The Addl. Asst.Engineer (Operation)

    APSPDCL.D-II, Machilipatnam.

3. The Asst.Accounts Officer,

    ERO Godugupeta, Machilipatnam.

4. The Addl.Asst.Engineer (Operation)

    APSPDCL, Pedana

5. The Divisional Engineer, Assessment division

     APSPDCL.,  PWD Grounds, Vijayawada.

6. The Superintending Engineer,

    Assessments, APSPDCL.,

    Plot No.1, 2^nd floor, AIR, Bypass Road,

    M.R.Pillai Circle, Tirupathi.                                               Appellants/

                                                                                                 Opp.parties

And

Peddapudi Jaganmohan Rao,

S/o.late Pushpanadham, R/o.Narikapalem

H/o.Nandapur, Pedna Mandal,

Krishna District.                                                                     Respondent/

                                                                                                 Complainant

Counsel for the Appellants: M/s O.Manohar Reddy

Counsel for the Respondent: Mr.N.Raghuveer

 QUORUM:   THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE D.APPA RAO, PRESIDENT                                                   

SRI SYED ABDULLAH, MEMBER.

AND

SRI R.LAKSHMI NARASIMHA RAO,  MEMBER

.                                                                 

TUESDAY, THE SEVENTH DAY OF DECEMBER,

TWO THOUSAND TEN

Oral order:(Per Hon’ble Justice Sri D.Appa Rao, President)
***

        Heard appellant counsel.  None appears for the respondent though he filed a counter

        This is an appeal preferred against the order of the District Forum in P.P.No.55/2005 dated 11-12-2008 directing the appellants to be arrested by issuing warrants.

        Aggrieved by the said order, the appellants preferred this appeal contending that the District Forum failed to observe that the amount was deposited and therefore the order of the District Forum was complied and consequently the warrants issued be recalled and P.P. be closed.

        Admittedly the amount was paid and in fact the appellants pleaded the District Forum to recall the warrants but the District Forum held that there is no provision to recall the warrants.  Obviously this is in untenable.  If the orders were complied, it is the bounden duty of the District Forum to recall the warrants.

        In view of the compliance of the order in C.D.No.10/2005 dated 19-1-2009 by the appellants, the appeal is allowed and the order of the District Forum in P.P.No.55/2005 issuing warrants is set aside.  The warrants, issued are directed to be recalled.  There shall be no order as to costs.

                                Sd/-PRESIDENT.

Sd/-MEMBER.

Sd/MEMBER.

JM                                                                                                                                     Dt.07-12-2010