Telangana High Court
WP/35103/2013 of P.V. Krishnaiah Vs The Government of Andhra Pradesh on 28 December 2013
A . RAJASHEKER REDDY Writ Petition No.35103 of 2013 Date: 06-12-2013 Between: P.V. Krishnaiah .. Petitioner AND The Government of Andhra Pradesh, represented by its Principal Secretary (Civil Supplies) and another .. Respondents HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE A . RAJASHEKER REDDY Writ Petition
Citations and Judicial Treatment
Cited by
0
Decisions in the index citing it
Cites
0
Decisions referred to
In this index
0
Of the decisions it cites
Overruled / Questioned
0
No negative treatment found
Loading the citing and cited decisions…
This judgment in the centre: on the left the decisions it cites, on the right the decisions citing it. Colour is the treatment; choose a decision to open it.
Conclusion
HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE A. RAJASHEKER REDDYWrit Petition No.35103 of 2013
Date:06-12-2013
Between:
P.V. Krishnaiah
.. Petitioner
AND
The Government of Andhra Pradesh, representedby its Principal Secretary (Civil Supplies) and another
.. Respondents
HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE A. RAJASHEKER REDDYWrit Petition No.35103 of 2013
ORDER:
The writ petition is filed seeking to declare the action ofthe 2[nd] respondent in suspending the authorisation of the petitionerfair price shop No.53, Kadapa Town, Kadapa vide proceedingsRef.C/4031/2012, dated 22-09-2012 as illegal, arbitrary and withoutjurisdiction.
2. The case of the petitioner is that the petitioner was allottedShop No.53 of fair price shop and is running the same since forthe last 30 years without any complaint from the card holders. Itis stated that the 2[nd] respondent issued proceedings inRef.No.C/4031/2011, dated 22-09-2013, suspending the authorization of the petitioner pending enquiry, on the premise thatthe petitioner has committed certain irregularities. The petitionersubmitted his explanation to the show cause notice issued on 17-12-2012, but the respondent authorities have not passed anyorders so far and the authorisation of the petitioner's fair priceshop is still kept under suspension by virtue of proceedings dated22-09-2012, which is challenged in this writ petition.
3. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and thelearned Assistant Government Pleader for Civil Supplies.
4. It is stated that the petitioner’s shop was inspected on 14-09-2012 and his authorisation was suspended by the proceedings dated 22-09-2012 issued by the 2[nd] respondent-RevenueDivisional Officer, Kadapa and in pursuance of the show causenotice dated 17-12-2012, the petitioner submitted his explanation,but the 2[nd] respondent did not pass any orders so far. This Courtin D. Sambasiva Rao v. Joint Collector, Guntur and others[[1]],held that the authorization of fair price shop cannot be kept undersuspension beyond a period of 90 days.
5. Therefore, having regard to the facts and circumstances ofthe case, and in view of settled principle of law, the authorisationof the fair price shop of the petitioner cannot be kept undersuspension beyond the period of 90 days, and hence, theimpugned proceedings are liable to be set aside.
6. Accordingly, the proceedings Ref.C/4031/2012, dated 22-09-2012 issued by the 2[nd] respondent-Revenue Divisional Officer,Kadapa is set aside and the respondents are directed to continuethe authorization of the petitioner as fair price shop dealer till theenquiry is completed by the 2[nd] respondent in pursuance to show cause notice dated 17-12-2012 issued by him.
7. With the above directions, 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: 06-12-2013
Ksn
[1]2007 (6) ALT 239