THE HON’BLE Ms. JUSTICE G. ROHINI WRIT PETITION No.14178 OF 2010 DATED: 23.06.2010 Between : T. Nagaiah … Petitioner And 1. The Joint Collector, Prakasam District at Ongole And others. .. Respondents THE HON’BLE Ms. JUSTICE G. ROHINI WRIT PETITION No.14178 OF 2010 ORDER : The petitioner herein is the authorized dealer of Fair Price Shop No.56 of Paramgudipalli Village, Kanigiri Mandal, Prakasam District. The Revenue Divisional Officer, Kandukur – 2nd respondent herein – issued a show-cause notice dated 4.5.2010 calling upon the petitioner to show-cause as to why his authorization should not be cancelled alleging that the petitioner had failed to distribute the essential commodities to the cardholders properly and thus caused inconvenience to them. It was also alleged that as per the enquiry report of the Enforcement Deputy Tahsildar, Kanigiri, dated 23.4.2010, it was found that wrong entries were made in the records in the fair price shop showing distribution of rice to the cardholders, whereas on enquiry with the villagers it was found that the said cardholders were not residing in the village. It was further alleged that the petitioner was not using the government certified weights and measures for distributing the essential commodities. Thus it was alleged that the petitioner had violated the provisions of the A.P. State Public Distribution System Control Order, 2008 as well as the conditions of authorization. The petitioner submitted his explanation denying the allegations. Thereafter by order dated 11.6.2010 the 2nd respondent cancelled the petitioner’s authorization holding that the alleged contraventions were established. The said order dated 11.6.2010 is under challenge in this writ petition. I have heard the learned counsel for the petitioner as well as the learned Government Pleader for Civil Supplies appearing for the respondents. Whereas the learned counsel for the petitioner vehemently contended that the impugned order of cancellation without conducting an independent enquiry as contemplated under the provisions of A.P. State Public Distribution Control Order, 2008 is arbitrary and illegal, the learned Government Pleader, while bringing to the notice of this Court that against the impugned order of cancellation the petitioner has already preferred an appeal and the same is pending before the 1st respondent – Joint Collector, Prakasam District, submitted that the writ petition is not maintainable and is liable to be dismissed in limini. It is not disputed before this Court by the learned counsel for the petitioner that the petitioner’s appeal against the impugned order of cancellation is pending before the 1st respondent. However it is submitted that in spite of the fact that the petitioner moved an application for interim suspension of the order of cancellation pending the appeal, the 1st respondent failed to consider the same. As the statutory appeal is admittedly pending before the 1st respondent, though I am not inclined to go into merits of the case and express any opinion as to the contentions raised by the petitioner, having regard to the facts and circumstances of the case, I am of the opinion that the balance of convenience is in favour of the petitioner and to meet the ends of justice, it would be appropriate to stay the operation of the order of the 2nd respondent dated 11.06.2010 till the disposal of the appeal pending before the 1st respondent. Accordingly, without expressing any opinion on merits, the Writ Petition is disposed of with a direction to the 1st respondent to dispose of the appeal pending on his file following due process of law as expeditiously as possible preferably within a period of six weeks from the date of receipt of this order. Till such time, the impugned order of cancellation of authorization dated 11.6.2010 passed by the 2nd respondent shall remain suspended. Writ Petition is accordingly disposed of. No costs. _____________ G. ROHINI, J. Dt. 23.06.2010 gbs