THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE C.V.RAMULU W.P.No.2794 of 2005 ORDER: This writ petition is filed seeking Certiorari to call for records relating to Proceedings No.D.Dis.D1/CS/846/04 dated 11.2.2005 passed by the first respondent and quash the same as arbitrary, illegal and violative of principles of natural justice. The petitioner is a fair price shop dealer of Appecherla village, Peddavaduguru mandal, Anantapur district. On the basis of a report purported to have been submitted by the Mandal Revenue Officer, Peddavaduguru mandal dated 7.7.2004, the first respondent issued a show cause notice dated 12.7.2004 to the petitioner calling for her explanation with regard to the irregularities committed and enumerated in the notice. The petitioner seems to have submitted her explanation to the said show cause notice. Thereafter, a detailed enquiry was conducted and the first respondent, at the first instance, passed orders dated 24.1.2005, suspending the authorization of the petitioner pending enquiry, but it is unfortunate that though it was found that all the charges are proved, no finding was recorded as to inflicting of punishment. Thereafter, the petitioner was not supplied with any essential commodities and hence he filed W.P.No.2063 of 2005. The said writ petition was allowed by this Court on 9.2.2005 holding that “since the earlier order of suspension has merged into the impugned proceedings, the authorization of the petitioner continues to be in force. In that view of the matter, she shall be entitled to be supplied the essential commodities until the second respondent passes a detailed, reasoned and valid order”. Further, in the above order, this Court observed that no show cause notice of any kind was issued to the petitioner before passing the order dated 24.1.2005. Immediately after disposal of the writ petition, the impugned order came to be passed on 11.2.2005 substituting few sentences here and there, cancelling the fair price shop authorization of the petitioner. Aggrieved by the same, the present writ petition is filed. The grievance of the petitioner is that in spite of there being an order passed by this Court in W.P.No.2063 of 2005, the first respondent has not chosen to give any show cause notice calling for her explanation in this regard. Therefore, there is no necessity of going into all other aspects. It is writ large that the respondents have not issued any notice, much less show cause notice to the petitioner before passing the impugned cancellation proceedings in spite of there being such a direction by this Court in the earlier writ petition as noticed above. Therefore, I am of the considered opinion that the first respondent has grossly violated the principles of natural justice and did not head to the suggestions made by this Court in the earlier writ petition. Therefore, the impugned order is liable to be set aside. In the result, the writ petition is allowed and the impugned order dated 11.2.2005 is set aside. No order as to costs. ______________ C.V.RAMULU, J Date: 31.8.2006 DA THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE C.V.RAMULU W.P.No.2794 of 2005 31.8.2006 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE C.V.RAMULU W.P.No.2794 of 2005 Dated: 31st August, 2006 Between: Smt.C.Malini .. Petitioner and The Revenue Divisional Officer, Anantapur, Anantapur district & another. .. Respondents