IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction) WEDNESDAY, THE TWENTIETH DAY OF APRIL TWO THOUSAND AND FIVE PRESENT THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE ELIPE DHARMA RAO WRIT PETITION NO : 7569 of 2005 Between: Smt.Parlapati Komalamma W/o.Raji Reddy R/o.Madhira Village Duggondi Mandal, Waragal district. ..... PETITIONER AND 1 The Joint Collector Warangal at Hanamakonda. 2 The Revenue Divisional Officer Narsampet Division Warangal District. 3 The Mandal Revenue Officer Duggondi Mandal Warangal District. .....RESPONDENTS Petition under Article 226 of the constitution of India praying that in the circumstances stated in the Affidavit filed herein the High Court will be pleased to May be pleased to issue a writ, order or direction more particularly one in the nature of writ of Mandamus declaring the action of the 2nd respondent in suspending the authorization of the petitioner in his proceedings No.B/1148/2004 dated.25-9-2004 and in not completing the enquiry as bad, arbitrary, illegal and Violation of Principles of Natural Justice and pass such other order or orders. Counsel for the Petitioner: MR.C.DAMODHAR REDDY Counsel for the Respondents: GP FOR CIVIL SUPPLIES The Court at the stage of admission made the following : ORAL ORDER: The main grievance of the petitioner is that the second respondent suspended her authorization as a Fair Price Shop dealer by an order dated 25.9.2004 for the alleged contraventions of about five conditions by her, and though the third respondent being an enquiry officer has submitted his report, the second respondent has not passed any final orders. The case of the petitioner is that on 11.8.2004 the Food Inspector, Narsampet inspected her shop premises complaining certain irregularities in distributing the Food for Work rice to the labour and sent a report to the second respondent, who in turn suspended her authorization as such. Aggrieved by the same, the petitioner preferred an appeal before the first respondent and the first respondent passed an order dated 18-10-2004 directing the second respondent to complete the enquiry and pass appropriate orders by 30-10-2004. Pursuant to that order, the second respondent, in turn, directed the third respondent to conduct a detailed enquiry. In that connection the third respondent visited the shop of the petitioner and verified the stocks and registers and submitted a report on 5.1.2005 to the second respondent. But the second respondent has not passed any orders on that so far. Hence the present writ petition. Having regard to the facts and circumstances of the case, and since the third respondent being an enquiry officer has already submitted his report by 5.1.2005, I deem it appropriate to dispose of the writ petition at the stage of admission with a direction to the second respondent to pass appropriate orders on the report submitted by the third respondent, as expeditiously as possible, preferably within two weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order, failing which, the licence of the petitioner as a fair price shop dealer has to be restored. No order as to costs. --------------------- kvsn 20-04-2005 To 1 The Joint Collector Warangal at Hanamakonda. 2 The Revenue Divisional Officer Narsampet Division Warangal District. 3 The Mandal Revenue Officer Duggondi Mandal Warangal District. 4 Two CCs to GP for Civil Supplies, High Court Buildings, Hyderabad. 5 Two CD copies.