Judgments
Judgments
  1. Home
  2. /
  3. High Court Of Telangana
  4. /
  5. 2014
  6. /
  7. January

G Satyanarayana vs The Joint Collector

High Court Of Telangana|24 April, 2014
|

JUDGMENT / ORDER

HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE A.RAMALINGESWARA RAO WRIT PETITION No.11874 of 2010 DATED: 24.04.2014 Between:
G. Satyanarayana ... Petitioner And The Joint Collector, Srikakulam district, Srikakulam & others … Respondents The Court made the following:
HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE A.RAMALINGESWARA RAO WRIT PETITION No.11874 of 2010 ORDER:
Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned Assistant Government Pleader for the respondents.
2. This writ petition was filed challenging the orders of the 2nd respondent in Rc.No.1300/2010/H, dated 12.05.2010 suspending the petitioner’s authorization, pending enquiry.
3. The facts of the case are, the Inspector of Vigilance and Enforcement, Srikakulam gave a phone call to the 2nd respondent- Revenue Divisional Officer, on 03.05.2010 stating that he was inspecting the fair price shop of Ponduru Major Grama Panchayat, Ponduru Mandal, Srikakalam district and requested him to attend the enquiry. A joint inspection was conducted and during the course of inspection, it was noticed that there was variation in the stock. It was also noticed that 0.36 quintals of PDS rice and AAP rice are found in excess and 0.20½ quintals of sugar shortage in the fair price shop. Thus the petitioner violated the Government instructions. It was also noticed that the dealer was selling kerosene oil at a higher rate of 0.25 paise and RG Dhal at a higher rate of Rs.1.00 per kg. It was further noticed that the dealer was directing PDS rice and sugar to the black market for his personal gains and thus contravened the provisions of APPDS Control Order, 2008. Since the irregularities are grave in nature, a case under Section 6-A of the Essential Commodities Act was booked and available stock was seized. The Revenue Divisional Officer, Srikakulam, issued a notice dated 12.05.2010 to the petitioner and called for his written explanation as to why authorisation should not be cancelled. Pending enquiry, the impugned proceedings were passed keeping the authorisation of the petitioner under suspension. At the time of filing of the counter by the respondents in the year 2010, the enquiry before the Joint Collector-1st respondent was also pending.
4. In the circumstances, the first respondent is directed to complete the enquiry against the petitioner, within a period of three months from the date of receipt of a copy of this order, if it was not already completed. The interim order granted by this Court on 26.05.3020 shall continue till the disposal of the enquiry against the petitioner.
5. With the above direction, the writ petition is accordingly disposed of. Pending miscellaneous petitions in this writ petition, if any, shall stand dismissed in consequence. No order as to costs.
A. RAMALINGESWARA RAO, J
Date: 24.04.2014 BSS HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE A. RAMALINGESWARA RAO 1 WRIT PETITION No.11874 of 2010 Date: 24.04.2014 BSS
Disclaimer: Above Judgment displayed here are taken straight from the court; Vakilsearch has no ownership interest in, reservation over, or other connection to them.
Title

G Satyanarayana vs The Joint Collector

Court

High Court Of Telangana

JudgmentDate
24 April, 2014
Judges
  • A Ramalingeswara Rao