The Hon’ble Sri Justice C.V.Nagarjuna Reddy Writ Petition No.38324 of 2014 Dated 12.12.2014 Between:
K.Chandrasekhar Reddy And The State of A.P., rep. by its Prl.Secretary Civil Supplies Dept., Hyderabad and 4 others.
…Petitioner …Respondents Counsel for the petitioner: Mr.K.Narsi Reddy Counsel for the respondents: GP for Civil Supplies (AP) The Court made the following:
Order:
This Writ Petition is filed for a Mandamus to set aside the proceeding in D.Dis.No.D1CS/5015/2014, dated 03-11-2014, of respondent No.4, whereby he has cancelled the petitioner’s authorization relating to fair price shop No.24 of Komatikuntla Village, Putlur Mandal, Anantapur District.
Inasmuch as an appeal is stated to have been filed by the petitioner against the impugned order before respondent No.3, this Court is not inclined to entertain this Writ Petition for adjudication on the legality or otherwise of the same. However, in the light of the petitioner’s grievance that respondent No.3 has not even numbered the appeal stated to have been filed by him as far back as 24.11.2014, I have examined the case for the limited purpose of considering whether the petitioner is entitled to be granted an interim order, pending the said appeal.
The main ground, on which respondent No.4 has suspended the petitioner’s authorization, is that there were variations, in the stocks of certain essential commodities, which include the variation of 8.56 quintals of excess rice on ground when compared to the stock register. The petitioner has, however, filed a copy of the stock register for the month of July, 2014, which prima facie shows that the ground balance was only 32 kgs. It also contains the purported signature of the checking officer. Besides this fact, a perusal of the impugned order shows that no enquiry, whatsoever, has been held by respondent No.4 and that he was mainly guided by report, dated 27- 07-2014, of respondent No.5.
Considering these facts, I find the elements o f prima facie case, balance of convenience and irreparable injury in favour of the petitioner for granting an interim order pending his appeal before respondent No.3. Accordingly, the proceeding in D.Dis.No.D1CS/5015/2014, dated 03-11-2014, of respondent No.4, is suspended, pending disposal of the petitioner’s appeal by respondent No.3.
The Writ Petition is, accordingly, disposed of.
As a sequel to disposal of the Writ Petition, WPMP.No.47954 of 2014, filed by the petitioner for interim relief, is disposed of as infructuous.
(C.V.Nagarjuna Reddy, J) Dt: 12th December, 2014
LUR