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

Gogula Srinivasa Rao vs State Of Andhra Pradesh And Others

High Court Of Telangana|28 November, 2014
|

JUDGMENT / ORDER

THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE C.V. NAGARJUNA REDDY WRIT PETITION No.36434 of 2014 Dated: 28.11.2014 Between:
Gogula Srinivasa Rao .. Petitioner and State of Andhra Pradesh, Rep. by its Principal Secretary, Civil Supplies Department, Secretariat, Hyderabad, and others.
.. Respondents Counsel for the petitioner: Mr. I. Koti Reddy Counsel for the respondents: A.G.P. for Civil Supplies (A.P.) The court made the following:
ORDER:
This writ petition is filed for a Mandamus to set aside proceedings in Rc.No.4020/2014-L dated 18.09.2014 of respondent No.2, whereby he has suspended the petitioner’s fair price shop authorization.
I have heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned Assistant Government Pleader for Civil Supplies (A.P.).
A perusal of the impugned proceedings shows that the principal charge on which the petitioner’s authorization has been suspended, namely; charge No.1 is that out of a total quantity of 45 quintals of PDS rice, 17 kgs. of rice was found in excess, while no variations were found in respect of sugar and salt. Charges 2 and 3 are not only stereotyped, which are found in almost all orders being passed by respondent No.2, but also too insignificant to warrant suspension.
Under Clause 24 of the A.P. State Public Distribution System (Control) Order, 2008 (for short ‘the Control Order’), variations upto 1.5% of the total stocks are permissible. Applying the said Clause, the variation of 17 kgs. out of 45 quintals of rice is well within the permitted variation. Thus, by suspending the petitioner’s authorization, respondent No.2 has acted in blatant contravention of Clause 24 of the Control Order.
For the above-mentioned reasons, the impugned order is set aside. As the very basis on which the proceedings have been initiated against the petitioner runs contrary to Clause 24 of the Control Order, respondent No.2 is restrained from proceeding further against the petitioner on the charges framed by him.
The writ petition is accordingly allowed. As a sequel to the allowing of the writ petition, W.P.M.P.No.45609 of 2014 shall stand disposed of as infructuous.
C.V. NAGARJUNA REDDY, J 28th November, 2014 IBL
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

Gogula Srinivasa Rao vs State Of Andhra Pradesh And Others

Court

High Court Of Telangana

JudgmentDate
28 November, 2014
Judges
  • C V Nagarjuna Reddy
Advocates
  • Mr I Koti Reddy