HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE A. RAJASHEKER REDDY Writ Petition No.11394 of 2014 Date: 16-04-2014 Between:
G (M) Satyanarayana .. Petitioner AND The State of Andhra Pradesh, represented by its Secretary, Civil Supplies Department, Secretariat, Hyderabad and 3 others .. Respondents HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE A. RAJASHEKER REDDY Writ Petition No.11394 of 2014 ORDER:
This writ petition is filed for a Mandamus declaring the inaction of the 2nd respondent in taking up stay petition in Appeal in CSA.No.75 of 2014 which was filed against the order of cancellation of authorisation in proceedings No.J/4005/2013, dated 01-01-2014 of the 3rd respondent pending disposal of the said appeal as illegal and discriminatory.
2. The grievance of the petitioner is that he is a fair price shop dealer holding authorisation for distribution of essential commodities vide authorisation No.J/5423/98, dated 11-04-1999, which is being renewed from time to time, at Door No.2-71, Ajjamarri Village, Kowdipally Mandal, Medak District. It is stated that the 3rd respondent issued show cause notice dated 21-11- 2013 on the allegation of the petitioner drawn commodities in respect of dead person vide Card No.WAP-1725010000412 since one year, pursuant to which the petitioner submitted his explanation on 04-12-2013 and even without conducting any enquiry with regard to alleged irregularities or without considering the explanation of the petitioner, the 3rd respondent issued proceedings dated 01-01-2014 cancelling the authorisation of the petitioner. Challenging the said proceedings, the petitioner preferred an appeal on 13-01-2014 in CSA.No.75 of 2014 along with stay petition, but no orders are passed so far. Aggrieved by the same, the present writ petition is filed.
3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the allegations are general in nature and the petitioner has already submitted his explanation, which is not considered by the 3rd respondent in proper way. He further contends that even though the appeal is filed along with the stay petition, the same is not considered by the 2nd respondent and that the petitioner is supplying stocks till April, 2014.
4. Heard the learned Assistant Government Pleader for Civil Supplies.
5. Having regard to the facts and circumstances of the case, since the petitioner has already filed an appeal before the 2nd respondent against the proceedings of the 3rd respondent as contended by the learned counsel for the petitioner, I deem it appropriate to direct the 2nd respondent to dispose of the appeal on merits in accordance with law, within a period of six (6) weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of the order. Till such decision is taken by the 2nd respondent on the appeal, the impugned proceedings dated 01-01-2014, which are challenged herein, shall remain suspended.
With the above directions, the writ petition is disposed of. No costs. As a sequel thereto, miscellaneous petitions, if any, pending shall stand closed.
A. RAJASHEKER REDDY, J Date: 16-04-2014 Ksn