HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE C.V.NAGARJUNA REDDY WRIT PETITION No.31498 of 2014 Date:20.10.2014 Between:
V.Nirmala, W/o Dayakar . Petitioner And:
The State of A.P., , reptd by its Principal Secretary, Food, Civil Supplies and Consumer Affairs Department, Hyderabad and three others.
. Respondents Counsel for the Petitioner: Sri V.Sudhakar Reddy Counsel for the Respondents: AGP for Civil Supplies (Andhra Pradesh) The Court made the following:
ORDER:
This Writ Petition is filed for a Mandamus to declare the action of respondent No.2 in not passing order on the stay application of the petitioner in the appeal, filed by her against order in proceedings No.Rc.C.114/2014, dated 16.09.2014, of respondent No.3 cancelling her fair price shop authorisation, as illegal and arbitrary.
A perusal of the record shows that respondent No.2 in his order, dated 14.02.2014, passed in the proceedings under Section 6-A of the Essential Commodities Act, 1955 has rendered a finding that the variation in the quantity relating to rice is within the permissible limits. However, he has found that the alleged variations pertaining to wheat, sugar, red gram dal, tamarind, salt and atta are in excess of the permissible limits. The petitioner has pleaded that as the inspection has taken place on 09.01.2014, which was the eve of Sankranti festival, due to heavy rush, she could not complete making of entries in the record during the day on which the inspection has taken place. Indeed, this Court in Writ Petition No.28969 of 2014, filed questioning the order of suspension of the petitioner’s fair price shop authorisation pending enquiry, by order, dated 24.09.2014, has directed that the petitioner shall be continued as the fair price shop dealer till completion of enquiry and passing of final order by respondent No.3. Inasmuch as the appeal filed by the petitioner against order of cancellation is pending before respondent No.2 and the petitioner is being continued on the strength of the above-mentioned order passed by this Court, I am of the opinion that it would be in the interests of justice that the petitioner is continued as fair price shop dealer till disposal of the appeal by respondent No.2.
The Writ Petition is, accordingly, allowed to the extent indicated above.
As a sequel to disposal of the Writ Petition, W.P.M.P.No.39373 of 2014 filed by the petitioner for interim relief stands disposed of as infructuous.
20th October, 2014 DR
JUSTICE C.V.NAGARJUNA
REDDY