IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction) MONDAY, THE SIXTEENTH DAY OF JUNE TWO THOUSAND AND EIGHT PRESENT THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE GODA RAGHURAM WRIT PETITION NO : 12068 of 2008 Between: Boyina Mallikarjuna Rao S/o.Ramaiah R/o.Mundruvaripalem village, Savalyapuram Mandal, Guntur District. ..... PETITIONER AND 1 The Joint Collector & Addl. District Magistrate, Guntur District. 2 The Revenue Divisional Officer, Narasaraopet, Guntur District. 3 The Mandal Revenue Officer, Savalyapuram Mandal, Guntur District. .....RESPONDENT(S) 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 to issue a writ of Mandamus or any other appropriate writ order or direction declaring the impugned order Rc.No.800/2004-B dated 8.4.2008 on the file of the Revenue Divisional Officer, Narasaraopet as illegal, arbitrary and violative of principles of natural justice and pass such other orders as deemed fit and proper in the facts and circumstances of the case. Counsel for the Petitioner:MR.D.KRISHNA MURTHY Counsel for the Respondent No.: GP FOR CIVIL SUPPLIES The Court made the following at the stage of admission : ORAL ORDER: Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned Government Pleader for Civil Supplies. The writ petition is directed against an order dated 8.4.2008 of the 2nd respondent, whereby and whereunder the authorization of the petitioner as a Fair Price shop dealer of Mundruvaripalem Village, has been suspended pending final determination, on allegations of irregularities in the running of the fair price shop. Against the said order of the 2nd respondent, the petitioner preferred an appeal to the 1st respondent under Clause 20 (1) and (2) of the A.P.S.P.D.S. (Control) Order, 2001 on 24.4.2008 along with an application for interim stay. The petitioner’s grievance is that the 1st respondent has neither disposed of the appeal nor the application for interim relief. The writ petition is filed challenging the order of the 2nd respondent against which an appeal has already been preferred. In the circumstances above, the writ petition is disposed of directing the first respondent to expeditiously and in any event within a period of two weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order consider and dispose of, either the appeal preferred by the petitioner or the application for interim relief. Nothing in this judgment shall be construed as an expression by this Court on the merits of the petitioner’s claim in the appeal. There shall be no order as to costs. GODA RAGHURAM, J Date: 16.6.2008 cvm