THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE V.V.S.RAO WRIT PETITION No.10241 of 2010 Dated:29.04.2010 Between: Alluri Chandraiah. ….Petitioner And The Collector (CS), Adilabad, Adilabad District, And others. …Respondents THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE V.V.S.RAO WRIT PETITION No.10241 of 2010 ORDER: The third respondent is the dealer of Fair Price Shop in Jangaom Village. The Tahsildar, Kotapally Mandal, caught hold Public Distribution System (PDS) rice worth Rs.2,800/- being transported in a bullock cart. A report was submitted to the Collector (Civil Supplies)/Joint Collector. Proceedings under Section 6-A of the Essential Commodities Act, 1955 (the Act), were initiated. By order dated 21.11.2009 and yet another order dated 19.12.2009 first respondent ordered confiscation of 100% of the seized stock. One order is in respect of PDS rice and the other is in respect of 200 litres of kerosene. The petitioner who is allegedly a cardholder attached to third respondent’s Fair Price Shop filed the instant writ petition complaining two things. He submits that the third respondent was let off by a simple order under Section 6-A of the Act and that the competent authority failed to take further disciplinary action under the Andhra Pradesh State Public Distribution System (Control) Order, 2008. The petitioner’s Counsel also submits that the third respondent is still continuing the clandestine business to the detriment of the cardholders. Therefore, he filed the instant writ petition. Any dealer or licensee aggrieved by an order under Section 6-A of the Act has a remedy under Section 6C of the Act. The petitioner has no such remedy. It does not, however, mean that he can impugn the proceedings under Section 6-A of the Act in a writ jurisdiction. If the petitioner has any complaint against the third respondent he may again give a complaint to the second respondent. Counsel for the petitioner in support of his contention relies on the resolution, dated 14.03.2010, of the Gram Panchayat resolving to cancel the authorization of the third respondent. It is trite to mention that it is only the second respondent who is the disciplinary authority to take action against the Fair Price Shop dealer and the Gram Panchayat has no such jurisdiction to take such action. The Writ Petition is misconceived, and the same is accordingly dismissed. _______________ (V.V.S.RAO, J) 29.04.2010 vs