THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE V.V.S.RAO WRIT PETITION No.2468 of 2010 Dated:12.03.2010 Between: Smt.Gamjala Sujatha. ...Petitioner And The Collector (CS), Adilabad, And others. ...Respondents THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE V.V.S.RAO WRIT PETITION No.2468 of 2010 ORDER: The petitioner is the dealer of Fair Price Shop (FPS) No.1 of Rampur Village, Dilawarpur Mandal in Adilabad District. First respondent herein initiated action under Section 6-A of the Essential Commodities Act, 1955 (the Act), on an allegation that there was a variation in the stock, that the petitioner failed to produce proper accounts for distribution of essential commodities and kerosene and that all the cardholders complained against her. After giving notice under Section 6B of the Act, by order dated 07.07.2007 the first respondent ordered confiscation of 93.45 quintals of rice in addition to 4.05 quintals and also directed to pay penalty of Rs.2,000/-. The order has become final. The petitioner alleges that after the finalization of proceedings under Section 6-A of the Act she approached the Revenue Divisional Officer for restoration of authorization which was suspended pending proceedings under Section 6-A of the Act. Instead of doing so, second respondent initiated action under Section 5(5) of the Andhra Pradesh State Public Distribution System (Control) Order, 2008 (the Control Order), calling upon the petitioner to show cause as to why her authorization should not be cancelled. The petitioner submitted explanation. After considering the same by impugned order dated 30.11.2009 the authorization of the petitioner was cancelled, aggrieved by which the present Writ Petition is filed. This Court heard the learned Counsel for the petitioner and the learned Assistant Government Pleader for Civil Supplies. It is the thrust of the argument that when proceedings under Section 6-A of the Act culminated in confiscation and fine, the proceedings for cancellation under Clause 5(5) of the Control Order cannot be initiated for the same allegations. The submission cannot be accepted. A perusal of Clause 19 of the Control Order and para 2(5) of Annexure-I belies any such contention. Be that as it is, every order of cancellation by the Revenue Divisional Officer is amenable to appeal under Clause 20 of the Control Order. The petitioner has not availed the remedy. Therefore, this Court is not inclined to go into the merits of the case at this state. Liberty is given to the petitioner to file an appeal before the Joint Collector, Adilabad, within a period of ten days from today. If the petitioner continued to supply/distribute essential commodities for the cardholders attached to FPS No.1 of Rampur Village even after the suspension order dated 13.12.2006, she may be continued for a further period of two months. The Joint Collector may also consider disposing of her appeal within a period of two months after the same is filed. The Writ Petition is accordingly disposed of. There shall be no order as to costs. ____________ (V.V.S.RAO, J) 12.03.2010 vs