IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction) TUESDAY, THE FIFTH DAY OF OCTOBER TWO THOUSAND AND TEN PRESENT THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE R. SUBHASH REDDY WRIT PETITION No.11982 of 2010 BETWEEN R. Chittemma. ... PETITIONER AND The Joint Collector, Chittoor and two others. ...RESPONDENTS Counsel for the Petitioner: MR. T. BALAJI Counsel for the Respondents: GP FOR CIVIL SUPPLIES The Court made the following order: ORDER: Petitioner is a fair price shop dealer of Shop No.6 of K.C. Palli Village, Penumuru Mandal, Chittoor District. In this writ petition, the petitioner has questioned the validity of the order dated 20.04.2010 passed in Roc.(B)/1267/2010 by the Revenue Divisional Officer, Chittoor under which the authorization granted to the petitioner is suspended, pending enquiry, on certain allegations. 2. At the stage of admission, this Court while issuing notice before admission by order dated 26.05.2010 suspended the impugned order and it is submitted that the petitioner is continuing as a dealer by virtue of the said order. 3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the allegations are trivial and technical and no suspension was warranted. However, in view of the letter addressed by the Tahsildar, Penumur, the impugned order is passed. 4. The correctness or otherwise of the allegations made against the petitioner is a matter to be considered by the Revenue Divisional Officer, Chittoor, while passing final orders. Though the learned counsel for the petitioner has produced a copy of the order passed by the Collector (Civil Supplies), Chittoor in Roc.D2-287-2010 dated 31.07.2010, as per Clause 5 (v) of Andhra Pradesh State Public Distribution System (Control) Order, 2008, the appointing authority is empowered to pass orders in disciplinary proceedings. In that view of the matter, if any findings are recorded by the Collector on the very same set of allegations, the petitioner can bring it to the notice of the RDO. 5. As much as the impugned order is only an order of suspension pending enquiry and as stated that the matter is still pending enquiry before the RDO, I deem it appropriate to direct the second respondent – RDO to complete the enquiry and pass appropriate final orders as expeditiously as possible preferably within a period of three (3) months from today. There shall be a further direction that the impugned order dated 20.04.2010 shall remain suspended till the enquiry is completed and appropriate final orders are passed. Subject to the above directions, the writ petition is disposed of. There shall be no order as to costs. __________________ R. SUBHASH REDDY, J October 5, 2010 DSK