THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE R.SUBHASH REDDY WRIT PETITION No.15893 of 2010 ORDER: In this writ petition, petitioner, who is an authorized fair price shop dealer for shop No.50 of K.Nasampalli Village, G.D.Nellore Mandal of Chittoor District, has questioned the order bearing No.Roc(B)1123/2008, dated 19.05.2008 passed by the second respondent - Revenue Divisional Officer, Chittoor, suspending his authorisation pending enquiry. In the very same order, the second respondent issued a direction to the third respondent – Tahsildar, G.D.Nellore Mandal, to make alternative arrangements for distribution of scheduled commodities to the cardholders. The impugned order is questioned mainly on the ground that the second respondent has not considered the subject matter independently and based on the report submitted by the Additional Superintendent of Police and Regional Vigilance and Enforcement Officer, Tirupati, he passed such order. On instructions, it is submitted by the learned Assistant Government Pleader for Civil Supplies that the enquiry on the allegations, which are mentioned in the impugned order itself, is still pending. No doubt, there is a reference to the report of the Additional Superintendent of Police and Regional Vigilance and Enforcement Officer in the impugned order, a perusal of which indicates that certain allegations are levelled against the petitioner with regard to misuse of the scheduled commodities, which were allotted for distribution of the same to the cardholders. Merely because the report was sent to the second respondent and taking such report as a prima facie material for the purpose of suspending the authorisation of the petitioner, I do not think that by itself is an illegality to set aside the impugned order. As much as the order of suspension was passed against the petitioner as early as on 19.05.2008 and as it is stated that the enquiry before the second respondent is still pending consideration, I deem it appropriate to direct the second respondent to complete the enquiry against the petitioner with regard to the allegations mentioned in the impugned order, as expeditiously as possible, within the outer limit of two (2) months from today. Subject to the above directions, the writ petition is disposed of. No order as to costs. ______________________ R.SUBHASH REDDY, J 14th JULY, 2010. kvni