Andhra Pradesh High Court
WP/21264/2019 of N JAMALAIAH Vs The State of Andhra Pradesh on 31 December 2019
SRI JUSTICE M. SATYANARAYANA MURTHY Writ Petition No.21264 of 2019 ORDER: 1. This writ petition under Article 226 of Constitution of India is filed, questioning the proceedings in Ref No.I(4)/484/2019 dated 22.10.2019, issued by third respondent herein/Joint Collector, YSR Kadapa
THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE M. SATYANARAYANA MURTHYWrit Petition No.21264 of 2019
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.
ORDER:
1. This writ petition under Article 226 of Constitution of India is filed, questioning the proceedings in Ref No.I(4)/484/2019 dated 22.10.2019, issued by third respondent herein/Joint Collector, YSR Kadapa District, cancelling the authorization of petitioner for Fair Price Shop No.1151012 of Narasapuram village, Sri Avadutha Kasinayana Mandal (SAKN) Mandal, YSR Kadapa District, declare the same as illegal, arbitrary and violative of principles of natural justice, consequently set aside the same, pending disposal of appeal filed by petitioner before Second respondent herein/District Collector, YSR Kadapa District.
2. The petitioner was appointed as Fair Price Shop dealer for shop No.1151012 of Narasapuram village, Sri Avadutha Kasinayana Mandal (SAKN) Mandal, YSR Kadapa District, vide Lr.No.D/26/2012 by Sub-Collector, Rajampet (Appointing Authority). Since then petitioner is distributing essential commodities to card holders, without complaint from card holders.
3. While things stood thus, on 16.06.2019, Enforcement Deputy Tahsildar, Mandal Revenue Inspector and Village Revenue Officer, inspected the shop of petitioner. On 07.07.2019 Village Revenue Officer, Narasapuram served show cause notice, on the petitioner, cancelling authorization of petitioner, which is impugned in the writ petition.
4. Aggrieved by the suspension order, petitioner preferred appeal before second respondent under Clause 24 (b) of A.P State Targeted Public Distribution System (Control) Order, 2018 (for short Control Order, 2018).
2 MSM, J
5. Since the proceedings before second respondent are admittedly pending, the petitioner is not entitled to prosecute parallel proceedings in two forums i.e. before High Court invoking Article 226 of Constitution of India and before appointing authority i.e. second respondent under Clause 24 (b) of Control Order, 2018. Therefore, instead of passing any order on merits, when proceedings are pending before second respondent, I find it appropriate to issue direction to second respondent to dispose of the enquiry and pass final order in the appeal filed by petitioner under Clause 24 (b) of Control Order, 2018, within ninety (90) from the date of receipt of copy of this order. The learned Counsel for petitioner is permitted to furnish a copy of this order to second respondent to act upon it and pass appropriate order in accordance with law.
6. With the above direction, the writ petition is disposed of. There shall be no order as to costs.
7. Consequently, miscellaneous petitions, pending if any, shall stand closed.
______________________________________
JUSTICE M. SATYANARAYANA MURTHY
Dated 31.12.2019 Rvk