HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE A. RAJASHEKER REDDY Writ Petition No.17893 of 2014 Date: 08-07-2014 Between:
D. Gangayamma .. Petitioner AND The Government of Andhra Pradesh, represented by its Principal Secretary, Revenue Department, Secretariat, Hyderabad and 3 others .. Respondents HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE A. RAJASHEKER REDDY Writ Petition No.17893 of 2014 ORDER:
This writ petition is filed for a mandamus declaring the action of the 3rd respondent in issuing suspension and show cause notice by his proceedings Rc.No.1853/14-G, dated 17-06-2014 as illegal and arbitrary and for a consequential direction to set aside the same.
2. The case of the petitioner is that the petitioner was appointed as Fair Price Shop dealer of Shop No.7, Kota Nemalipuri village, Rajupalem Mandal, Guntur District and has been distributing essential commodities to the cardholders without any complaint. It is stated that on 14-06-2014, the officials of Vigilance and Enforcement Department and CSDT, Guntur along with Deputy Tahsildar, T. Sunduru inspected the shop of the petitioner and found some irregularities committed by the petitioner and that she is not maintaining the records, as such, seized the available stock. The 3rd respondent, vide his proceedings in Rc.No.1853/14-G, dated 17-06-2014, suspended the authorisation of the petitioner on the ground that she has not maintained the records properly and diverted the PDS rice into black market for her personal gain. Aggrieved by the same, the present writ petition is filed.
3. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned Assistant Government Pleader for Civil Supplies.
4. Since it is alleged that the petitioner is not maintaining the records, the respondent authorities cannot verify the stock and find the irregularities alleged to have been committed by the petitioner. Even though the petitioner stated that he is maintaining the records properly, this is a disputed question of fact, which cannot be decided by this court. However, the 3rd respondent can consider the said aspect. In the enquiry to be conducted, the petitioner has also alternate remedy by way of appeal against the impugned proceedings. Hence, the writ petition is devoid of merit and the same is liable to be dismissed.
Accordingly, the writ petition is dismissed. No costs. As a sequel thereto, miscellaneous petitions, if any, pending shall stand closed.
A. RAJASHEKER REDDY, J Date: 08-07-2014 Ksn