THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE C.V.NAGARJUNA REDDY WRIT PETITION No.40140 of 2014 Between:
K.Venkateswarlu and
DATE: 27.12.2014
…Petitioner The State of Andhra Pradesh and others …Respondents COUNSEL FOR THE PETITIONER : SRI NAGARAJU NAGURU COUNSEL FOR THE RESPONDENTS : AGP FOR CIVIL SUPPLIES (AP) THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE C.V.NAGARJUNA REDDY WRIT PETITION No.40140 of 2014
ORDER:
This writ petition is filed for a mandamus to set-aside proceedings vide Roc.K/1979/2014, dated 22.07.2014 of respondent No.3 whereby he has suspended the petitioner’s fair price shop authorization.
I have heard Sri Nagaraju Naguru, learned Counsel for the petitioner and the learned Assistant Government Pleader for Civil Supplies (Andhra Pradesh).
A perusal of the impugned proceedings shows that the allegations levelled against the petitioner are that he has distributed lesser quantities of essential commodities to the cardholders than their entitlement for the last five years and thereby misused Qtls.31.20 kgs of rice and that though some of the cardholders died, entries were made as if the essential commodities were distributed to them.
On the face of it, the allegation that the petitioner has been indulging in malpractice for the last five years reflects the inefficiency of the officials. More than the petitioner, it is the official respondents against whom disciplinary proceedings need to be initiated for allowing a fair price shop dealer to indulge in acts of omissions and commissions for the last five years. As the petitioner appears to be a soft target, respondent No.3 has suspended his fair price shop authorization. As regards the allegation that the petitioner has made false entries in the name of dead persons, the same is too vague as respondent No.3 failed to point out the names of those dead persons. At any rate, the allegations levelled against the petitioner require a detailed enquiry and for the alleged acts, which are stated to be taking place for the last five years, the petitioner’s fair price shop authorization cannot be suspended without conducting an enquiry.
For the above mentioned reasons, the impugned proceedings is set-aside. The respondents are directed to continue the petitioner as fair price shop dealer. However, this order will not preclude respondent No.3 from framing specific charges and holding a detailed enquiry by following the procedure as explained by this Court in Smt. B. Manjula
[1]
Vs. District Collector, Civil Supplies, Kurnool and others.
Subject to the above direction, the Writ Petition is allowed.
As a sequel to the disposal of the Writ Petition, WPMP.No.50336 of 2014 filed by the petitioner for interim relief is disposed of.
C.V.NAGARJUNA REDDY, J 27th DECEMBER, 2014.
kvni
[1] Writ Petition No.32713 of 2011, dated 26.11.2014