IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction) FRIDAY, THE SEVENTEENTH DAY OF OCTOBER TWO THOUSAND AND EIGHT PRESENT THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE V.V.S.RAO WRIT PETITION No.23692 of 2002 Between: SK.Khasim Saheb S/o Shaik R/o. Boppudi Village and Post, Guntur District. ..... PETITIONER AND 1 The Collector and District Magistrate, Guntur. 2 The Joint Collector, Guntur. 3 The Revenue Divisional Officer, Narasaraopet (Post), Guntur 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 rule nisi calling for the record and quash the order passed by the Collector and District Magistrate, Guntur in Revision Case No.10/2002-S7 dated 19-6-2002, by issuing an appropriate Writ, order or direction in the nature of Certiorari; and pass such further or other orders as this Hon’ble Court may deem fit and proper in the case. Counsel for the Petitioner: SRI E.V.BHAGIRATHA RAO Counsel for the Respondents: GP FOR REVENUE The Court made the following : THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE V.V.S.RAO WRIT PETITION No.23692 of 2002 ORDER: The petitioner was appointed as Fair Price Shop (FPS) dealer of Boppudi Village in 1978. It appears, the Deputy Tahasildar (Civil Supplies) sent a report to the third respondent alleging that the petitioner did not lift the essential commodities from July 2000 to December 2000 in spite of repeated instructions and caused inconvenience to cardholders. Therefore, the third respondent issued a show cause notice calling for explanation with regard to charges, and also suspended the authorization by proceedings dated 03.01.2001. The petitioner did not submit explanation. Therefore, by proceedings dated 17.01.2001 the third respondent cancelled the authorization of the petitioner. Feeling aggrieved by the same, petitioner ﬁled an appeal, which was dismissed by the second respondent on 27.04.2002. His revision petition was also dismissed by the ﬁrst respondent on 19.06.2002. This order is assailed in the writ petition. A counter aﬃdavit is ﬁled giving the details of the facts and circumstances leading to suspension and cancellation of authorization. The petitioner has annexed a copy of the revisional order dated 19.06.2002, which would show that the petitioner was given a show cause notice calling for explanation, but he did not submit explanation. This factum is, however, not denied in the aﬃdavit accompanying the writ petition. Indeed, it is admitted by the petitioner in the writ aﬃdavit that at the relevant period he was suffering from acute arthritis, and therefore, he could not lift the stocks. The same cannot be a justiﬁable ground for not running the FPS. There is no denial that as per clause 4 of the Andhra Pradesh Scheduled Commodities (Regulation of Distribution by Card System) Order, 1973 (the Control Order, for brevity), and conditions of authorization in Form-II read with Rule 3(5), an authorized FPS dealer has to keep the shop open and distribute essential commodities to the cardholders. Any contravention thereof entails in cancellation of authorization under clause 3(4) of the Control Order. A perusal of the impugned order would show that the petitioner was correctly found guilty of contravening the Control Order and the conditions of authorization. As held by a Division Bench of this Court in T.Edukondalu v Revenue Divisional Oﬃcer [1], the question of fact as to whether the petitioner contravened the conditions of authorization and Control Order cannot be adjudicated in a writ petition. The Writ Petition is misconceived, and the same is accordingly dismissed with costs. ____________ (V.V.S.RAO, J) 17.10.2008 vs To 1 The Collector and District Magistrate, Guntur. 2 The Joint Collector, Guntur. 3 The Revenue Divisional Officer, Narasaraopet (Post), Guntur District. 4 2CCs to G.P for Revenue, High Court of A.P., Hyderabad. 5 2CD copies Form-NIC-OGS/WP{MADHURI} [1] 1999 (5) ALT 600 (DB)