THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE R. SUBHASH REDDY Writ Petition No.27746 of 2007 ORDER: 1 Petitioner is Fair Price Shop dealer for shop No.1 of Padali village, Hiramandalam Mandal in Srikakulam District. She filed the present Writ Petition questioning the order dated 25.11.2007 passed in proceedings No.124/2006 by the Tahsildar of Hiramandalam Mandal suspending the authorisation of the petitioner. A perusal of the impugned order shows that there is an allegation made against the petitioner to the effect that a relative of the petitioner has collected an amount of Rs.250/- from the cardholders for the purpose of issuing new ration cards through biometric system. 2 In this case, it is to be noticed that on the very same set of allegations, earlier an order was passed by the Revenue Divisional Officer, Palakonda suspending the authorisation of the petitioner, as against which, the petitioner filed W.P.No.13551 of 2006 which was allowed by setting aside the order of suspension. Instead of conducting an enquiry into the allegations, it appears, again the Tahsildar passed the impugned order of suspension. 3 As per the provisions of the Control Order, which is in force, the power of the Tahsildar to suspend the authorisation is only for a maximum extent of 90 days. When the matter is taken up, it is submitted by the learned Assistant Government Pleader for Civil Supplies that no proceedings have been initiated by the Revenue Divisional Officer to conduct enquiry on the allegations made against the petitioner. In the present writ petition this court granted interim order by suspending the impugned order of suspension and the said order continued all along. 4 The earlier order passed by the Revenue Divisional Officer, who is the competent authority to conduct enquiry into the allegations, was set aside by this court giving liberty to the respondent authorities to proceed with the matter as per law, after putting the petitioner on notice and after conducting a detailed enquiry into the matter. Therefore, in view of the order dated 14.07.2006 passed by this court in W.P.No.13551 of 2006, there is no reason for again placing the authorisation of the petitioner under suspension, pending enquiry. Inasmuch as it is stated that no further steps are taken to enquire into the allegations made against the petitioner, I deem it appropriate to set aside the impugned order. 5 For the aforesaid reasons, the writ petition is allowed and the impugned order is hereby set aside. No order as to costs. -------------------------- R.Subhash Reddy, J. 20.10.2011 Kvsn