IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction) THURSDAY, THE ELEVENTH DAY OF SEPTEMBER TWO THOUSAND AND EIGHT PRESENT THE HON'BLE MS JUSTICE G.ROHINI WRIT PETITION NO : 17525 of 2007 Between: Devarkonda Srinivasa Rao, S/o. Gapa Rao, R/o. Jujjuru (V), Veerlupadu mandal, Krishna District. ..... PETITIONER AND 1 The State Rep. by the Principal Secretary, To Government of Andhra Pradesh, Revenue (Civil Supplies) Department, Secretariat, Hyderabad. 2 The Revenue Divisional Officer, Vijayawada, Krishna District. .....RESPONDENTS 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 or direction particularly in the nature of Certiorari or any other appropriate writ, quashing the proceedings in Rc.No. A7/2878/04, dated 26-7-2007 on the ﬁle of the 2nd respondent and pass such other order or orders as this Hon'ble Court may deem ﬁt and proper in the circumstances of the case. Counsel for the Petitioner: MR.V.R.AVULA Counsel for the Respondent No.: GP FOR CIVIL SUPPLIES The Court made the following : THE HON’BLE Ms. JUSTICE G. ROHINI WRIT PETITION No. 17525 of 2007 O R D E R: This writ petition is ﬁled seeking a declaration that the proceedings of the 2nd respondent dated 26-07- 2007 under which the petitioner’s authorization in respect of the fair price shop of Jujjuru Village was cancelled on the ground that C.C.No.65 of 2005 on the ﬁle of the Court of the Judicial Magistrate of First Class, Nandigama is pending against the petitioner for an oﬀence under Section 420 IPC as arbitrary and illegal. This Court, while directing Rule Nisi, by order dated 23-08-2007, ordered that no permanent appointment shall be made with regard to the shop in question. When the matter is taken up today, the learned counsel for the petitioner while submitting that during the pendency of this writ petition, C.C.No.65 of 2005 ended in acquittal, contended that since the ground on which the authorization was cancelled is not subsisting, the respondents are bound to restore the petitioner’s authorization. Having regard to the subsequent events, the writ petition is disposed of granting leave and liberty to the petitioner to make a representation for restoration of his authorization in view of his acquittal in C.C.No.65 of 2005. If any such representation is made within two weeks from today, the respondents shall consider the same and pass appropriate orders in accordance with law within a period of four weeks thereafter. No costs. ______________ G. ROHINI,J Date: 11-09-2008 Note: Issue C.C. in three days. KLP