IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction) MONDAY, THE FOURTH DAY OF AUGUST TWO THOUSAND AND EIGHT PRESENT THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE V.ESWARAIAH WRIT PETITION No.18417 of 2003 Between: D.Yellaiah s/o Narsaiah R/o Shankaraj Kondapur Village., Shankarampet Mandal., Medak District. ..... PETITIONER AND 1 The District Collector., Medak District at Sangareddy. 2 Joint Collector., Medak at Sangareddy. 3 Revenue Divisional Officer., Medak. 4 Mandal Revenue Officer., Shankarampet (R) Mandal., Medak 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 may be pleased to issue an Order, Direction or Writ more particularly one in the nature of Writ of Certiorari by quashing the impugned order bearing Case No.CSA/1/Rev/2003 dated 5-6-2003 passed by the 1st Respondent herein confirming the orders dated 28-03-2003 & 25-09-2002 passed by the 2nd and 3rd respondent respectively, as illegal, arbitrary, violative of principles of natural justice and contrary to the provisions of control order 1973, besides violative of Fundamental Rights guaranteed under Article 14,19 and 21 of the Constitution of India and consequently allow the Petitioner to continue as Fair Price Shop Dealer by restoring authorization. Counsel for the Petitioner:MR.G.ANANDAM Counsel for the Respondent No.: GP FOR CIVIL SUPPLIES The Court made the following : THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE V.ESWARAIAH WRIT PETITION No.18417 of 2003 ORDER: Heard the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner as well as the learned Government Pleader appearing for the respondents. Petitioner questions the order of the 3rd respondent, dated 25- 09-2002 in cancelling the authorization of the petitioner as fair price shop dealer of S.Kondapur Village, Shankarampet (R) Mandal, Medak District, as confirmed by the 2nd respondent through order, dated 28-03-2003, as well as the 1st respondent through order, dated 05-06-2003. A perusal of the impugned order passed by the 3rd respondent goes to show that the petitioner was allowed to be continued as Fair Price Shop dealer with a let of warnings as was down by him as a first mistake through proceedings of the Revenue Divisional Officer, Medak, dated 15-11-2001. As the petitioner has not lifted the essential commodities, a show cause notice has been issued to the petitioner on 09-04-2002 asking him as to why the dealership shall not be cancelled on the ground that the petitioner has not lifted the essential commodities for the months of November 2001 and January to March, 2002, for which, an explanation has been filed stating that he could not lift the essential commodities for the aforesaid months as his daughter was burnt in the fire accident in her mother-in-laws place and valuable things are brunt due to which he sustained heavy loss and therefore, he could not lift the essential commodities. After considering the said contentions, the 3rd respondent through order, dated 25-09-2002 cancelled the authorization of the petitioner. Aggrieved by the same, the petitioner preferred an appeal before the 2nd respondent. The 2nd respondent through order, dated 28-03-2003, held that the petitioner is not adhering to time schedule fixed by the Government and thereby causing inconvenience to the card holders and accordingly, dismissed the appeal confirming the order of the 3rd respondent. Aggrieved by the same, the petitioner filed a revision before the 1st respondent. The 1st respondent through order, dated 05-06-2003, held that the petitioner failed to lift quota for the aforesaid months and thereby causing inconvenience to the card holders and accordingly dismissed the revision confirming the orders of the 2nd respondent as well as the 3rd respondent. In view of the concurrent findings recorded by the courts below, I do not find any illegality or irregularity in the impugned order so as to call for interference by this Court under Article 226 of the Constitution of India. Accordingly, the writ petition is dismissed. There shall be no order as to costs. ___________ 08-04-2008 Prv ` ..... REGISTRAR // TRUE COPY // SECTION OFFICER To 1.2CCs to 2.2CD copies Form-NIC-OGS/WP{VEENA}