V SEENAIAH Vs. EXECUTIVE ENGINEER HOUSING WARANGAL DIVISION

JUDGEMENT

(1.) ON 19-11-2002, while admitting the Civil Revision Petition, in c. M. P. No. 22235/2002 interim stay had been granted. C. M. P. No. 4377/2008 is filed by the 1st respondent in the Civil Revision Petition praying for vacation of the said interim stay.

(2.) THOUGH the matter is coming under the caption "interlocutory", at the request of the Counsel on record, the Civil Revision Petition itself had been taken up for final hearing and thus the same is being disposed of finally.

(3.) SRI K. V. Satyanarayana, the learned Counsel representing the revision Petitioner had pointed out to the relevant provisions of A. P. Housing board Act 1956 (in short hereinafter referred to as "act" for the purpose of convenience) and would maintain that the order made by the Primary Authority being not in accordance with law, the mere fact that certain reasons had been recorded by the Appellate Authority may not cure this initial defect and hence the order which is being challenged cannot be sustained. The Counsel also pointed out relating to the discrepancy of the arrears, whether it may be rs. 19,000/- and odd or Rs. 11,000/- only. The Counsel would maintain that the mere fact that the Revision Petitioner was set exparte before the Primary authority would not alter the situation in any way and even in such a case, the primary Authority is expected to record reasons and the one line order made by the Primary Authority not being in accordance with law, since the Appellate authority cannot cure the said initial defect of the Primary Authority though certain reasons had been recorded by the Appellate Authority, both the orders to be set aside and the matter to be remitted to the Primary Authority to make an order in accordance with law.