WP/24522/2004 of P. Siva Krishnaiah, Vs The Reveue Divisional Officer, on 29 December 2004

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD

(Special Original Jurisdiction)

WEDNESDAY, THE TWENTY NINTH DAY OF DECEMBERTWO THOUSAND AND FOUR

PRESENT

THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE L.NARASIMHA REDDY

WRIT PETITION NO : 24522 of 2004

Between:

P. Siva Krishnaiah, S/o. Subrahmanyam, Lingayapalle Village, Vallur Mandal, Kadapa District.

AND

..... PETITIONER

1 The Revenue Divisional Officer, Kadapa, Kadapa District.2 The Mandal Revenue Officer, Vallur Mandal, Kadapa District.

.....RESPONDENT(S)

Petition under Article 226 of the constitution of India praying that in thecircumstances stated in the Affidavit filed herein the High Court will be pleased toissue a writ, order or direction more particularly one in the nature of writ ofMandamus declaring the action of the 1st respondent in suspending theauthorization of the petitioner as Fair Price Shop Dealer of Lingayapalle Village inVallur Mandal of Kadapa District in his Ref.C/1040/2004 dated 2112-2004 withoutissuing any notice and without conducting any enquiry as illegal, unjust, arbitraryand against the principles of natural justice, extraneous and consequently set asidethe order passed by the 1st respondent in his Ref.C/1040/2004, dated 21-12-2004.

Counsel for the Petitioner:MR.L.J.VEERA REDDYCounsel for the Respondents: GP FOR CIVIL SUPPLIES

The Court at the stage of admission made the following ORDER:

The authorisation of the petitioner was suspended by the first respondent throughproceedings dated 21-12-2004 on the allegation that he sold the essentialcommodities at higher rates and that two bags of rice meant for public distributionwere sold at Rs.740/- in favour of one Smt.Salamma. It is also stated that theproceedings under Section 6-A of the Essential Commodities Act were initiatedbefore the Joint Collector. The petitioner challenges the order of suspension.

Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned Government Pleader for CivilSupplies.

The petitioner had an effective remedy by way of an appeal under Clause 20 of theAndhra Pradesh Public Distribution System Control Order, 2001 before the JointCollector. The appellate authority is conferred with the power to pass interim ordersalso. Hence, this Court is not inclined to admit the writ petition filed against the orderof suspension.

Learned counsel for the petitioner states that no alternative arrangements have beenmade in place of the petitioner and that the petitioner may be continued till theappellate authority takes up the application that may be filed by the petitioner.

Hence, the writ petition is disposed of leaving it open to the petitioner to prefer anappeal before the appellate authority. In case no alternative arrangements havebeen made in place of the petitioner, status quo obtaining as on today shall bemaintained till the appellate authority passes orders in the application for stay,provided that it is filed within 10 days from today. No orders as to costs.

______________

29-12-2004

Note: Issue C.C. by three days.

(B/o)

kdl

To

1 The Revenue Divisional Officer, Kadapa, Kadapa District.

2 The Mandal Revenue Officer, Vallur Mandal, Kadapa District.

3 Two CCs to the Government Pleader for Civil Supplies, A.P.High Court Buildings,Hyderabad (OUT).Hyderabad (OUT).

4 Two CD copies.