THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE GOPALA KRISHNA TAMADA WRIT PETITION No.19016 of 2009 DATE:11.09.2009 Between: B. Upender ... Petitioner and The State of Andhra Pradesh represented by the Tahsildar, Torrur Mandal, Warangal District. ... Respondent THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE GOPALA KRISHNA TAMADA WRIT PETITION No.19016 of 2009 ORDER: This writ petition is filed by the petitioner seeking a Writ of Mandamus to declare the action of respondent in issuing proceedings No.A/1050/2009 dated 01.09.2009 keeping his authorisation under suspension, as illegal and arbitrary. 2. Briefly, the case of the petitioner is that he is a dealer in respect of a fair price shop No.3 of Torrur Village and Mandal, Warangal District, and has been distributing the essential commodities to the cardholders without any complaint. While so, on 31.08.2009 the Vigilance Authorities inspected his shop and having found variation in the stock of rice supplied in connection with mid-day meals scheme, seized the excess rice and registered a case against him under Section 6-A of the Essential Commodities Act, 1955. Thereafter, he reported the matter to the Joint Collector, Warangal District and the Tahsildar, Torrur mandal, Warangal District – respondent herein. Pursuant to the report dated 31.08.2009, the respondent issued proceedings No.A/1050/2009, dated 01.09.2009, keeping his authorisation under suspension. The same is challenged in this writ petition. 3. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner as well as the learned Assistant Government Pleader for Civil Supplies. 4. The main contention of the learned counsel for the petitioner is that according to Clause 4 of the Andhra Pradesh Scheduled Commodities (Regulation of Distribution by Card System) Order, 1973, the Appointing Authority can suspend the authorisation of any fair price shop dealer only after making an enquiry. According to him, as the Appointing Authrity in this case is the Revenue Divisional Officer, Torrur Mandal, the order dated 01.09.2009 passed by the respondent is without jurisdiction. In this connection, the learned counsel has drawn my attention to the Andhra Pradesh Scheduled Commodities (Regulation of Distribution by Card System) Order, 1973. This Court is not inclined to accept the contention of the learned counsel for the reason that the said order is not in existence. 5. After several changes, the Andhra Pradesh State Public Distribution System (Control) Order, 2008 has come into force. As per the said Control Order, 2008, the relevant provision is Clause 5 and Sub-clause 5 of Clause 5 reads as follows: The Appointing Authority may, at any time, whether at the request of the authorised fair price shop dealer/nominated retailer/hawker or authorised establishment on suo motu after making such enquiry as may be deemed necessary and for reasons to be recorded in writing, add to, amend, vary, suspend or cancel the authorisation issued or deemed to be issued to him under this clause. If it is restricted to Sub-clause 5 alone, definitely it can be said that it is only the Appointing Authority i.e. the Revenue Divisional Officer that can pass an order of suspension pending enquiry. But the proviso to Clause 5 of the Control Order, 2008 clearly envisages that the Tahsildar also is competent to keep the authorisation under suspension, but for a limited period. According to the said proviso, the Tahsildar also is equally competent to suspend the authorisation, but the said suspension is only for a period of 90 days. In the light of the aforesaid proviso, this Court is of the view that the contention of the learned counsel for the petitioner that the Tahsildar, Torrur Mandal has no jurisdiction cannot be countenanced. That apart, as against an order of suspension, the petitioner has an alternative efficacious remedy of appeal, as provided for under Clause 20 of the Control Order, 2008. According to the said Clause, an appeal lies to the Revenue Divisional Officer. For the foregoing reasons, this Court is of the view that there are no merits in this writ petition. 6. Accordingly, this writ petition is dismissed, giving liberty to the petitioner to approach the appellate authority and file an appeal within a period of one week from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. On filing such an appeal, the appellate authority shall dispose of the same within a period of four weeks. If for any reason the appeal is not disposed of within the time specified above, the authorisation of the petitioner shall be restored and he shall be supplied with the essential commodities so as to enable him to distribute the same to the cardholders. There shall be no order as to costs. _________________________ GOPALA KRISHNA TAMADA, J 11th September, 2009 CBS THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE GOPALA KRISHNA TAMADA WRIT PETITION No.19016 of 2009 (Dismissed) 11th September, 2009 CBS