IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction) THURSDAY, THE FOURTEENTH DAY OF AUGUST TWO THOUSAND AND EIGHT PRESENT THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE GODA RAGHURAM WRIT PETITION NO : 16642 of 2008 Between: M. Noorjahan D/o. Allabakash Baig Kothapalli Street, Rayachoty Town and Mandal, R/o. 24/154, Sundupalli Road, Rayachoty Town, Kadapa District. ..... PETITIONER AND 1 The Government of Andhra Pradesh, rep. by its Joint Collector, Kadapa, Kadapa District. 2 The Revenue Divisional Officer, Kadapa, Kadapa District. 3 The Mandal Revenue Officer, Rayachot Mandal, Kadapa 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 to issue an appropriate writ, order or direction more particularly one in the nature of writ of mandamus declaring the proceedings in Ref.C/1185/2008, dated 22.07.2008 issued by the 2nd respondent as arbitrary, illegal, politically motivated, colorable exercise of power, contrary to the provisions of the Andhra Pradesh Public Distribution System Control Order, 2001 and violative of Principles of Natural Justice apart from being violative of the fundamental rights guaranteed to the petitioner under Articles 14, 19 (1) (g) and 21 of the Constitution of India and consequently set aside the same and pass Counsel for the Petitioner:MR.V.R.REDDY KOVVURI Counsel for the Respondent No.: GP FOR CIVIL SUPPLIES The Court made the following : THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE GODA RAGHURAM W.P.No. 16642 of 2008 Oral Order: Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned Government Pleader for Civil Supplies for respondents. The petitioner assails the order dated 22-07-2008 of the 2nd respondent whereby and whereunder the petitioner’s authorization in respect of the Fair Price Shop No. 4 of Kottapally street, Rayachoty town and mandal, was suspended pending enquiry on the ground that when the business premises was inspected, the authorizee was not present; her whereabouts were not known; and when the inspection team opened the lock of the shop it was seen that the Stock Sales Register and Coupons were not seen in the shop premises. The stated quantity of the essential commodities were seized and handed over to the Mandal Revenue Inspector, Rayachoty for safe custody. The petitioner assails the order of suspension on several grounds on merits including that according to the extant administrative instructions, the authorizee is required to keep open the shop only up to 11-00 A.M. in the forenoon and therefore when the inspecting staff visited the shop at 11-40 A.M. she was not there and this could not have been made legitimately a ground for suspension. It is also the case of the petitioner that as per the oral argument that the Stock, Sales Register and Coupons being fragile instruments were kept in a locker by the petitioner and therefore they were not found in the Fair Price Shop. The order impugned is an order suspending the authorization pending enquiry. Such an order can be gainfully challenged on limited grounds viz., that an incompetent authority has passed the order or the order is passed mala fide. The grounds on which the petitioner assails the order is that there are no adequate grounds for ordering the suspension pending enquiry. That is not a ground for challenging the order of suspension pending enquiry. All challenges to the merits of the suspension and the facts which would go to show the irrationality in the decision making process of the order of suspension are more appropriately urged in an appellate forum. The petitioner has available an appellate remedy before the 1st respondent under the provisions of the Andhra Pradesh State Public Distribution System (Control) Order, 2008. On the above analysis, the writ petition is dismissed with liberty to the petitioner to pursue the appellate remedy. The petitioner may file an appeal before the 1st respondent, if so desired, within one week from to d a y . On filing such an appeal, the 1st respondent shall expeditiously consider and pass appropriate orders within four weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. No costs. ____________________ GODA RAGHURAM, J Dated: 14-08-2008 pvks Nb:- Furnish c.c. as soon as possible. B/o pvks