HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE A. RAMALINGESWARA RAO WRIT PETITION No. 25753 OF 2009 DATED 4th SEPTEMBER, 2014.
BETWEEN S.Venkata Ramaiah ……Petitioner and The District Collector (Civil Supplies), Prakasam District, Ongole and ors.
…..Respondents.
HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE A. RAMALINGESWARA RAO WRIT PETITION No. 25753 OF 2009
ORDER:
Heard the learned Counsel for the petitioner and learned Government Pleader for Respondent No.4.
The petitioner is a graduate. He was appointed as a Fair Price Shop dealer of Pothavaram Village of Darsi Mandal in Prakasam District in the year 1985. His authorization was valid up to 2009. While functioning as such, he was appointed as an In-charge Fair Price Shop dealer of Devavaram village. While so, the third respondent suspended his authorization on 10.11.2001 on the grounds that he diverted 200 liters of kerosene oil and committed some other irregularities. Aggrieved by the same, the petitioner preferred an appeal before the second respondent and as the second respondent did not dispose of the appeal within time, he filed Writ Petition No. 25329 of 2001 which was disposed of by this Court directing the second respondent to dispose of the appeal and pending disposal of the appeal, the petitioner was directed to continue as Fair Price Shop Dealer. Pursuant to the order of this Court, the second respondent disposed of the appeal directing the third respondent to complete the enquiry in the year 2002 itself. But the third respondent issued show cause notice on 20.04.2004 after lapse of four years framing charges alleging that the petitioner committed certain irregularities in the year 2001. The petitioner submitted explanation to the said show cause notice on 10.05.2006. The third respondent after considering the explanation submitted by the petitioner cancelled the authorization by proceedings dated 16.05.2006. Challenging the same, the petitioner preferred an appeal before the second respondent, who disposed of the same by order dated 26.06.2006 remanding the matter to the third respondent to conduct detailed enquiry at the village. After the said order of remand, the third respondent issued show cause notice on 28.01.2008 and the petitioner submitted explanation on 7.2.2008 against the irregularities alleged to have been committed by him in the year 2001. The third respondent cancelled the authorization of the petitioner on 29.02.2008. Challenging the same, the petitioner preferred appeal before the second respondent and the said appeal was dismissed by order dated 13.10.2008. Against the said order, a revision petition along with stay application was preferred before the first respondent on 18.10.2008. As the first respondent did not pass orders on the stay application, the petitioner approached this Court by way of filing Writ Petition No. 23470 of 2008, which was disposed of by this Court by order dated 29.10.2008 directing the first respondent to dispose of the stay application and till such time, the petitioner should be continued as Fair Price Shop dealer. The first respondent ultimately dismissed the revision petition by order dated 18.11.2009. Challenging the said order, the present Writ Petition was filed.
Though a specific charge against the petitioner was framed with regard to diverting of 200 liters of blue kerosene oil in four plastic cans into black market and another charge that he sold essential commodities at higher rate, it is not known whether the said irregularities stated to have been committed by the petitioner relate to the Fair Price shop of Pothavaram, to which the petitioner is a regular Fair Price dealer or whether they relate to Fair Price Shop of Devavaram Village, to which, the petitioner was only an in-charge dealer. All the proceedings stated supra took place basing on the charges, however, in the counter filed before this Court it was specified that the said allegations relate to Fair Price shop of Devavaram village, but it is not known as to why the villagers of Pothavaram were called for enquiry on 20.02.2008 along with Devavaram villagers. On the basis of the said vague charges framed by the third respondent, the appeal and revision were proceeded with.
Having regard to the conspectus of the matter, the orders passed by the first and second respondents are set aside and the matter is remanded to the third respondent for framing appropriate charges against the petitioner within a period of three months from the date of receipt of a copy of this order.
Thereupon the petitioner shall be provided with due opportunity of submitting his explanation and after conducting due enquiry thereon, pass appropriate orders within three months from the date of receipt of the explanation from the petitioner. Till such time, the petitioner shall be continued as Fair Price Shop dealer of Pothavaram Village of Darsi Mandal, Prakasam District.
The Writ Petition is allowed to the extent indicated above. Consequent thereon, miscellaneous petitions pending consideration if any in the Writ Petition shall stand closed. No order as to costs..
JUSTICE A. RAMALINGESWARA RAO Dated 4th September, 2014. Msnro