HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE A. RAJASHEKER REDDY Writ Petition No.28957 of 2013 Date: 22-01-2014 Between:
Pindi Puspalatha .. Petitioner AND The District Collector, Nalgonda District and 2 others .. Respondents HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE A. RAJASHEKER REDDY Writ Petition No.28957 of 2013 ORDER:
The present writ petition is filed seeking a mandamus for declaring the action of the 2nd respondent-the Revenue Divisional Officer, Nalgonda in suspending the petitioner’s fair price shop dealership of Chinna Madharam village, Kanagla Mandal, Nalgonda District vide proceedings in E.S.C/3557/2013, dated 25-09-2013 without giving any reasons as illegal and arbitrary.
2. The case of the petitioner is that the petitioner was appointed as a Fair Price Shop Dealer of Chinna Madharam village in the year 2009 and since then she has been distributing essential commodities without there being any complaint from any corner. It is stated that she received a notice in proceedings No.C/3557/2013, dated 13-09-2013 from the 2nd respondent on the ground of some irregularities alleged to have been committed by them in distributing essential commodities to the card holders and that on receipt of the said notice, the petitioner submitted her explanation on 21-09-2013 narrating all the facts to the allegations mentioned in the notice. Thereafter, the 2nd respondent issued proceedings in E.S.C/3557, dated 25-09-2013 suspending the authorisation of the petitioner’s dealership for a period of three months without any reasons. Challenging the said proceedings, the present writ petition has been filed.
3. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned Assistant Government Pleader for Civil Supplies.
4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that though the petitioner submitted her explanation to the show cause notice, the 2nd respondent issued the impugned proceedings, without giving any reasons and without considering her explanation, suspending her fair price shop authorisation, which amounts to violation of principles of natural justice. He further contended that the period of three months as stated in the impugned proceedings has already elapsed pursuant to which the petitioner is entitled for supply of stock.
5. Admittedly, the impugned proceedings was issued by the 2nd respondent-Revenue Divisional Officer, Nalgonda suspending the petitioner’s fair price shop authorisation for a period of three months without giving any reasons. The said proceedings also do not show that the said suspension is pending enquiry under the Essential Commodities Act. The impugned proceedings did not assign any reasons as to why the authorisation of the petitioner is liable to be suspended.
6. Therefore, in the facts and circumstances and having regard to the fact that the period of suspension for three months has already elapsed as on today, the petitioner is entitled to supply of essential commodities so long as her authorisation is valid and subsisting.
7. Accordingly, the respondents are directed to supply of essential commodities to the petitioner enabling her to distribute the same to the card holders so long as her authorisation is valid and subsisting. 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: 22-01-2014 Ksn