THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE R.SUBHASH REDDY WRIT PETITION No.25622 of 2008 ORDER: In this Writ Petition, petitioner has questioned order, dated 24.10.2006 passed by the third respondent – Revenue Divisional Officer, Gadwal, in proceedings No.G/1699/2006. By the aforesaid order, the authorisation granted to the petitioner under the provisions of the Andhra Pradesh State Public Distribution System Control Order, 2001, is cancelled on the ground that the charges framed against him were held proved. The appellate and revisional authorities also confirmed the said order. There are two charges framed against the petitioner alleging that he is collecting higher price for sale of kerosene to the cardholders @ Rs.10/- per liter instead of Rs.9.50ps., as prescribed by the Government, and he was not maintaining the timings and is opening the shop at his whims and fancies and causing inconvenience to the cardholders. He submitted explanation on 24.10.2006. There upon, the third respondent by the impugned order, on the ground that the petitioner has not denied the charges framed against him, cancelled the fair price shop authorisation granted in his favour. Though he has filed appeal before the appellate authority and revision before the revisional authority, both ended in dismissal. In this Writ Petition, it is submitted by the learned counsel for the petitioner that no proper enquiry was conducted before passing the impugned order and report, dated 14.09.2006, of the Deputy Tahsildar (Enforcement), Gadwal, is not furnished. It is to be noticed that based on the inspection, a preliminary report was filed and thereby, the proceedings were initiated and the petitioner was issued show cause notice to submit his explanation on the charges framed against him. Though the explanation of the petitioner is not filed along with the Writ Petition, the learned counsel for the petitioner has produced a copy of the same before this Court, when the matter is heard. A perusal of the explanation submitted by the petitioner on 24.10.2006 in response to the show cause notice issued to him indicates that he sought excuse for the mistake done by him and also assured to sell the stocks at the notified rates in future. From this, it is clear that the petitioner was selling the essential commodities to the cardholders at higher rates and not opening the shop as per the guidelines issued by the respondents. As much as the charge framed against the petitioner in regard to selling the essential commodities, which are being supplied to the cardholders from the fair price shop, at higher rates, is proved and as it is a serious misconduct and it runs contrary to the very objective of the Scheme itself, and taking into account the explanation submitted by the petitioner, the authorities by recording a correct finding, cancelled his fair price shop authorisation. For the aforesaid reasons, I do not find any illegality in the impugned order, which requires interference by this Court under Article 226 of the Constitution of India. The Writ Petition is devoid of merit and it is accordingly dismissed. No order as to costs. ______________________ R.SUBHASH REDDY, J 14th SEPTEMBER, 2011. kvni