WP/25226/2004 of Sri V. Eshwariah, Vs The Jt. Collector, on 31 December 2004

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD

(Special Original Jurisdiction)

FRIDAY, THE THIRTY FIRST DAY OF DECEMBERTWO THOUSAND AND FOUR

PRESENT

THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE L.NARASIMHA REDDY

WRIT PETITION NO : 25226 of 2004

Between:

Sri V. Eshwariah, S/o. V.Chandraiah,

Kotyal Village, Mulugu mandal, Medak District.

AND

..... PETITIONER

1 The Jt. Collector, Medak District at Sangareddy.

2 The Revenue Divsional Officer, Medak District at Siddipet Division.

.....RESPONDENTS

Petition under Article 226 of the constitution of India praying that in thecircumstances stated in the Affidavit filed herein the High Court will be pleasedto Issue an appropriate Writ, Order or direction more particularly one in thenature of writ of Mandamus declaring the and set aside the notificationNo.B/1101/2004 dt. 21.12.2004 issued by the R2 for appointment of .P. Shopdealer at Kotyal village, in the place of the petitioner.

Counsel for the Petitioner: MR.BOLLAM LINGAIAH YADAV

Counsel for the Respondents: GP FOR CIVIL SUPPLIES

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

The authorization of the petitioner, as a fair price shop dealer was cancelledthrough order dated -12-2004 served on him on 07.12.2004, on the ground thathe committed certain irregularities while running the shop. Aggrieved thereby,the petitioner preferred an appeal. The grievance of the petitioner is that evenwhile the appeal is pending, the second respondent issued a notification dated21.12.2004 proposing to select and appoint a fair price shop dealer for the shophitherto held by him.

Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned Government Pleader forCivil Supplies.

The petitioner availed the remedy of appeal, aggrieved by the order ofcancellation of his dealership. The legality or otherwise of the order ofcancellation, needs to be determined by the appellate authority, after examining the record and considering the contentions advanced on behalf of the petitioner.It is not as if the order of cancellation was passed very long back. If any dealeris appointed for that very shop during the pendency of the appeal, severalcomplications would arise and in a way, would foreclose the outcome of theappeal.

For the foregoing reasons, the writ petition is disposed of directing thatthe second respondent may proceed with the selection process, but shall notissue the orders of appointment to the selected candidates till the firstrespondent disposes of the appeal preferred by the petitioner against the orderof cancellation. There shall be no order as to costs.

---------------------

31.12.2004

ksld

To

1 The Jt. Collector, Medak District at Sangareddy.

2 The Revenue Divsional Officer, Medak District at Siddipet Division.

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