IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction) TUESDAY, THE FOURTH DAY OF November TWO THOUSAND AND EIGHT PRESENT THE HON'BLE MS JUSTICE G.ROHINI WRIT PETITION NO : 23972 of 2008 Between: A. Ramalingeswara Reddy S/o. A. Eswara Reddy R/o.3-358, Topavanam, Anantapur, Anantapur District. ..... PETITIONER AND 1 The Vice Chairman and Managing Director, A.P. State Civil Supplies Corporation Limited, Civil Supplies Bhavan, Somajiguda, Hyderabad. 2 The Joint Collctor and EOED, A.P. State Civil Supplies Corporation Limited, Anantapur, Anantapur District. 3 The District Manager, A.P. State Civil Supplies Corporation Limited, Anantapur, Anantapur District. 4 The Anantapur District Lorry Owners Association, rep. by its President Srinivasulu, H.No.1-446, Arunodaya Colony, Anantapur, Anantapur District. .....RESPONDENT(S) 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 a writ, order or direction more particularly one in the nature of Writ of Mandamus to call for the records relating to the Order No. PDS/MOVT.11(5)2008, dt. 20.10.2008 of the 2nd respondent and declare the same as illegal, arbitrary and further direct the respondents to continue the petitioner for transportation of food grains as a stage-I Contractor in terms of agreement dt. 8.4.2008. Counsel for the Petitioner : MR. P.RAGHAVENDRA REDDY Counsel for the Respondents : MR. D.LINGA RAO The Court made the following : THE HON’BLE Ms. JUSTICE G. ROHINI WRIT PETITION No.23972 OF 2008 ORDER : The petitioner herein has been appointed as a transport contractor by the 1st respondent Corporation for transporting the foodgrains in Anantapur District for the year 2008-2009. This writ petition is ﬁled questioning the 2nd respondent’s order dated 20.10.2008 whereunder the contract in favour of the petitioner has been suspended with immediate eﬀect alleging diversion of PDS stock from the Food Corporation of India, Jangalpally to Tanakal MLS Point cont ending inter alia that the alleged diversion of the foodgrains is absolutely false and at any rate the petitioner cannot be made liable for the same. Having heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and Sri D. Lingarao, the learned Standing Counsel appearing for the Corporation, I do not ﬁnd any justiﬁable reason to interfere with the impugned order of suspension which is made as an interim measure pending enquiry. It is also relevant to note that as per the terms of the agreement executed between the petitioner and the respondents, the 1st respondent Corporation is empowered to suspend the contract during the currency of the agreement if the contractor or his representative is involved in case of diversion of stock. It is true that the petitioner is disputing the alleged diversion of PDS stocks, however since it is a matter for enquiry by the competent authority and it is neither necessary nor proper for this Court to express any opinion at this stage. Moreover, the contract in question being a non-statutory contract voluntarily entered into between the parties, both parties are bound by the terms and conditions of the same. Therefore even assuming that there is breach of any of the terms and conditions, the remedy of the petitioner is elsewhere but he cannot invoke the extraordinary jurisdiction of this Court under Article 226 of the Constitution of India. However, having regard to the facts and circumstances of the case, the Writ Petition is disposed of leaving it open to the respondents to proceed with the enquiry and pass appropriate orders following due process of law as expeditiously as possible preferably within a period of six weeks from the date of receipt of this order. Till such time, there shall be a direction to the respondents not to award the work in question to any third party. No order as to costs. ______________ G. ROHINI, J. Dt. 04.11.2008 gbs Note:- CC in 3 days. (B/o) gbs