THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE C.V.NAGARJUNA REDDY W.P.No.30457 of 2010 Date : 6-12-2010 Between : Abburi Venkata Raghavamma .. Petitioner And The State of Andhra Pradesh, represented by its Collector (Civil Supplies), Kakinada, East Godavari District and others .. Respondents Counsel for petitioner : Sri N.Siva Reddy Counsel for respondents : Assistant Government Pleader for Civil Supplies The court made the following : ORDER: This Writ Petition is filed for a mandamus to set-aside order vide proceedings No.Ref.H/7455/2010 dated 10-11-2010 of respondent No.2 whereby he has suspended the petitioner’s fair price shop authorisation. I have heard Sri N.Siva Reddy, learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned Assistant Government Pleader for Civil Supplies. A perusal of the impugned order shows that on the basis of an inspection held by the Assistant Supply Officer, Rajahmundry, Assistant Grain Purchasing Officer and Grain Purchasing Assistant, on the directions of the Collector (Civil Supplies), East Godavari District, reports were submitted by them to respondent No.2 wherein it was stated that the petitioner was in unlawful possession of seven cards belonging to the card holders and thereby he has violated Clause 22(ii) of A.P. Public Distribution System (Control) Order, 2008 (for short, “the Control Order”). Respondent No.2 further stated in the said order that a criminal case was registered against the petitioner and as per Clause 2(5) of the Control Order, if any criminal case is registered, the fair price shop authorisation is liable for suspension or cancellation and that accordingly in exercise of his powers under the Control Order he has suspended the petitioner’s authorisation. On an earlier occasion, the petitioner has filed W.P.No.28860/2010 which was permitted to be withdrawn having regard to the fact that a petition seeking quashing of F.I.R. was pending before this Court. The petitioner has averred in his affidavit that by order dated 30-11-2010, this Court quashed the F.I.R. in Crl.P.No.11397/2010 on the ground that the ingredients of Section 420 IPC are not attracted to this case. This Court has however left the respondents free to take action under the relevant provisions. The learned Assistant Government Pleader for Civil Supplies candidly admitted that with the quashing of the criminal case by this court, Clause 2(5) of Annexure-I of the Control Order in the impugned order of respondent No.2 has lost its application and relevance. As noted above, the criminal case itself is quashed by this court with liberty to the respondents to initiate appropriate proceedings for taking disciplinary action against the petitioner if he is found indulging in any misconduct in running the fair price shop. As the impugned order is solely based on the factum of registration of the criminal case which ended in its quashment, the same cannot be sustained in law. Accordingly, the impugned order is quashed with liberty to the respondent No.2 to initiate proceedings under Clause 5 of the Control Order if he is satisfied that the petitioner is guilty of commissions and omissions in running the fair price shop. Subject to the above observation, the Writ Petition is allowed. ________________________ Justice C.V.Nagarjuna Reddy Date : 6-12-2010 AM