HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE A. RAJASHEKER REDDY Writ Petition No.14177 of 2014 Date: 29-04-2014 Between:
S. Kurminaidu .. Petitioner AND The Revenue Divisional Officer, Palakonda, Srikakulam District and 2 others .. Respondents HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE A. RAJASHEKER REDDY Writ Petition No.14177 of 2014 ORDER:
The writ petition is filed for declaring the action of the 1st respondent by issuing proceedings in Rc.No.68/2014, dated - 02-2014 suspending the authorization of the petitioner’s fair price shop as illegal and arbitrary.
2. The grievance of the petitioner is that the petitioner is a fair price shop dealer of Maddivalasa village, Vangara Mandal, Srikakulam District and has been distributing commodities to the card holders without any complaint. The petitioner was issued a show cause notice dated 28-01-2014 for certain irregularities pursuant to which he submitted explanation on 05-02-2014, but the 1st respondent, without considering the explanation of the petitioner, issued the impugned proceedings dated 25-02-2014 suspending the authorization of the petitioner’s fair price shop. Aggrieved by the same, the present writ petition is filed.
3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that though show cause notice is issued to the petitioner to which he submitted his explanation, the impugned proceedings are passed without considering the explanation, without giving reasons and without indicating any time limit for suspension. He also contends that no final orders are passed and no enquiry is conducted till today.
4. Learned Assistant Government Pleader for Civil Supplies states that the suspension of authorization is pending enquiry and final orders will be passed after an enquiry is conducted.
5. In this case, admittedly, the petitioner was issued a show cause notice dated 28-01-2014 calling upon the petitioner to submit his explanation for the irregularities committed by him, pursuant to which the petitioner submitted his explanation on 05- 02-2014, but the 1st respondent issued the impugned proceedings dated 25-02-2014 suspending the authorization of the petitioner’s fair price shop pending enquiry, stating that the explanation of the petitioner is not satisfactory. The impugned proceedings do not show any application of mind by the 1st respondent and does not contain any time limit for suspension of the authorization and it is simply stated that pending enquiry the authorization is suspended temporarily.
6. Therefore, without going into the merits of the case, since the impugned proceedings are issued without any application of mind, the same is liable to be set aside.
7. Accordingly, the proceedings in Rc.No.68/2014, dated 25- 02-2014 issued by the 1st respondent suspending the authorization of the petitioner are set aside. However, it is open for the 1st respondent to pass appropriate orders considering the explanation of the petitioner submitted already after affording a reasonable opportunity of hearing to the petitioner.
The writ petition is accordingly disposed of. No costs. As a sequel thereto, Miscellaneous Petitions, if any, pending shall stand closed.
A. RAJASHEKER REDDY, J Date: 29-04-2014 Ksn