THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE NOUSHAD ALI WRIT PETITION No.23725 of 2011 Date: 24.08.2011 Between: K. Srinivasa Reddy … Petitioner and The Joint Collector, Kurnool, Kurnool District and others. … Respondents THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE NOUSHAD ALI WRIT PETITION No.23725 of 2011 ORDER : Heard Sri K.V. Raghuveer, learned counsel appearing for the petitioner, as well as the learned Government Pleader for Civil Supplies appearing for the respondents, and with their consent the writ petition is being disposed of at the admission stage. 2. The petitioner, whose authorisation to run the Fair Price Shop has been suspended for more than 18 months without completing the enquiry, has filed this writ petition assailing the proceedings Rc.No.B.343/2010, dated 10.2.2010 of the 2nd respondent-Revenue Divisional Officer, Kurnool, Kurnool District, as arbitrary and illegal. 3. The petitioner is a Fair Price Shop dealer of Shop No.35 of Pulathota Village, Kurnool Mandal, Kurnool District. On 4.8.2009, the Mandal Revenue Inspector along with the Village Revenue Officer, Gondiparla Village inspected the shop of the petitioner and found that the petitioner was not opening the shop regularly and distributing the commodities at higher rates and also issuing lesser quantities. Based on a report vide Lr.Rc.E.1167/2009, dated 17.8.2009 submitted by the 3rd respondent-Tahsildar, Kurnool Mandal, Kurnool District, the 2nd respondent herein vide proceedings Rc.No.B.343/2010, dated 10.2.2010 suspended the authorisation of the petitioner pending the enquiry under sub-clause (5) of Clause-5 of the A.P. State Public Distribution System (Control) Order, 2008. Aggrieved by the same, the petitioner preferred an appeal before the 1st respondent- Joint Collector, Kurnool, Kurnool District. The 1st respondent, after considering the matter in detail, disposed of the said appeal vide proceedings L.Dis.(CS3).134/2010, dated 5.5.2010 and remanded the matter to the 2nd respondent with a direction to finalise the enquiry proceedings within a period of four weeks after giving due opportunity to the petitioner. The grievance of the petitioner is that even though the said order was passed on 5.5.2010, the 2nd respondent has not concluded the enquiry so far. Therefore, the petitioner has filed the present writ petition for the aforesaid relief. 4. Indisputably, the authorisation of the petitioner was suspended on 10.2.2010 and the 1st respondent-appellate authority has directed the 2nd respondent to conclude the enquiry within a time frame. In matters of this nature, the Statutory authorities are expected to conduct the enquiry and pass appropriate orders expeditiously within a time frame. In the instant case, more than one year has elapsed and there does not appear to be any valid reason for keeping the matter pending for such a long time. 5. In the circumstances, the writ petition is disposed of directing the 2nd respondent to complete the enquiry initiated in pursuance of the report dated 17.8.2009 submitted by the 3rd respondent and pass appropriate orders as expeditiously as possible, preferably within a period of four weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. No order as to costs. ________________________ JUSTICE NOUSHAD ALI 24.08.2011. NOTE:- Issue C.C. in two days. (B/O) Msr THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE NOUSHAD ALI WRIT PETITION No.23725 of 2011 24.08.2011 (Msr)