THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE R.SUBHASH REDDY WRIT PETITION Nos.21304 of 2006 and 26852 of 2008 COMMON ORDER: Petitioner is common in both these Writ Petitions, as such, they are heard together and being disposed of by this common order. Petitioner is the fair price shop dealer of Kokkiliputtuga Village, Kanchili Mandal, Srikakulam District. On the allegation that she is not residing in the Village after her marriage, basing on the report sent by the fourth respondent – Tahsildar, Kanchili Mandal, Srikakulam District, the third respondent – Revenue Divisional Officer, Tekkali, Srikakulam District, passed order on 11.07.2006 in Rc.No.1563/2006, suspending her fair price shop authorisation pending finalization of enquiry. As against the same, she filed Writ Petition No.21304 of 2006, in which, this Court passed interim orders on 13.10.2006 suspending the said suspension order. While continuing as such, based on the representation of M.L.A., Ichapuram alleging that the petitioner is not properly distributing the essential commodities to the cardholders, the fourth respondent passed order on 09.04.2008 in Rc.No.131/2008 suspending her fair price shop authorisation pending enquiry, which action is questioned by her in Writ Petition No.26852 of 2008, in which also, this Court passed interim orders as early as on 10.12.2008 and the same continued all along. When the matter is taken up, it is represented by the learned Assistant Government Pleader for Civil Supplies appearing for the respondents that in view of the interim orders passed by this Court in both the Writ Petitions, the petitioner is continuing as a fair price shop dealer and no enquiry is conducted on the allegations levelled against her and the enquiry is still pending. As much as there are certain allegations levelled against the petitioner, there is no reason for keeping the matter pending for such a long time in the absence of any order granting stay of enquiry. It appears, without any just reason, the matter is kept pending without conducting enquiry on the allegations levelled against the petitioner. As the orders of suspension of fair price shop authorisation of the petitioner were passed as early as on 11.07.2006 and 09.04.2008 and as it is stated that in view of the interim orders passed by this Court on 13.10.2006 and 10.12.2008 suspending the said suspension orders, she is continuing as a fair price shop dealer and the enquiry in both the cases is to be conducted, I deem it appropriate to direct the third respondent to conduct enquiry on the allegations levelled against the petitioner in the impugned orders of suspension and pass appropriate orders, by giving her an opportunity of hearing, as expeditiously as possible, within a period of three (3) months from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. Further, there shall be a direction that the impugned orders of suspension shall remain suspended till the third respondent passes appropriate final orders. The Writ Petitions are disposed of with the directions referred to above. No order as to costs. ______________________ R.SUBHASH REDDY, J 22nd NOVEMBER, 2011. kvni