IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction) SATURDAY, THE NINETEENTH DAY OF APRIL TWO THOUSAND AND EIGHT PRESENT THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE V.ESWARAIAH WRIT PETITION No: 18408 of 2004 BETWEEN: B. Nageswara Rao, S/o. B. Sri Ramulu, 14th Block, Macherla Town, Guntur District. ... PETITIONER AND 1 Revenue Divisional Officer, (Civil Supplies) Narasaraopet, Guntur District. 2 Mandal Revenue Officer, (Civil Supplies), Macherla Mandal, Guntur 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 Issue any writ, order or direction particularly one in the nature of writ of Certiorari calling for the records leading up and including the order in Rc.No.1516/2004-B, dated. - 9-2004 passed by the 1st respondent and declare the action of the 1st respondent in passing the order in Rc.No.1516/2004-B, Dt. -9-2004 in suspending the authorization of the Fair Price Shop Dealership of Petitioner without giving reasonable opportunity to the petitioner in stating his case and without hearing in person as per Clause 8 (1) of A.P. Scheduled Commodities Dealers (Licensing & Distribution) Order, 1982 and also in violation of principles of natural justice and consequently quash the same and to pass such other order or orders. Counsel for the Petitioner: MR.V.PADMANABHA RAO Counsel for the Respondents: GP FOR CIVIL SUPPLIES The Court made the following: ORDER: Petitioner questions the order of the Revenue Divisional Officer Narasaraopet dated -09-2004 in Rc.No.1516/2004-B in suspending his fair price dealership on the ground that he charged higher rates to the cardholders and failed to maintain the timings. He submits that the authorization has been suspended without giving any notice and without giving any opportunity. 2. This Court suspended the impugned suspension order and thereafter it was made absolute. The suspension order was passed pending enquiry. Whenever any suspension order is passed, there should be an expeditious enquiry for taking appropriate final action. There cannot be any justification in not framing charges and in not completing the enquiry. 3. Having regard to the facts and circumstances of the case, the first respondent is directed to complete the enquiry, if not already completed, by giving reasonable opportunity to the petitioner in accordance with law. Till the enquiry is completed and final orders are passed, the interim order granted by this Court staying the suspension order shall continue. The writ petition is accordingly disposed. There shall be no order as to costs. ______________ V. ESWARAIAH, J April 19, 2008 DSK