IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction) FRIDAY, THE SEVENTEENTH DAY OF OCTOBER TWO THOUSAND AND EIGHT PRESENT THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE V.V.S.RAO WRIT PETITION No.22612 of 2008 Between: K. Shiva Kumar S/o. Late K. Ashok Kumar F.P. Shop No.552, Circle No.V, H.No.12-1-485/145, Indira Nagar, Hyderabad. ..... PETITIONER AND 1 The Chief Rationing Officer Secunderabad. 2 The Dist. Supply Officer (City) Hyderabad. 3 The Assist. Supply Officer Circle No.5, Hyderabad. .....RESPONDENTS 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 issue a writ order or direction more particularly one in the nature of Writ of Mandamus declaring the action of the 1st respondent in not disposing of the Appeal dt.08-09-2008 ﬁled by the petitioner against the order vide proceedings No.393/2008 in B/3952/2008, dt.30-08-2008 of the 2nd respondent as illegal, arbitrary, and violation of principles of natural justice and pass such other order or orders as this Hon’ble Court may deem fit and proper in the circumstances of the case. Counsel for the Petitioner: SRI JANARDHAN REDDY Counsel for the RespondentS: GP FOR CIVIL SUPPLIES The Court made the following : THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE V.V.S.RAO WRIT PETITION No.22612 of 2008 ORDER: The petitioner is authorized Fair Price Shop (FPS) dealer of shop No.552, Circle No.V, Indira Nagar, Hyderabad. By an order dated 30.08.2008 the petitioner’s authorization was suspended by the second respondent on an allegation that he is not conducting business in FPS and allowed one Vidyadhar to run the shop. Other irregularities were also alleged. While passing suspension order, second respondent also passed orders to the eﬀect that the House Hold Supply Cards of FPS No.552 are tagged on to FPS No.559. Be that as it is, aggrieved by the order of the second respondent, the petitioner preferred an appeal before the ﬁrst respondent under relevant clause in the Control Order on 08.09.2008. It appears, the petitioner also ﬁled an application for interim stay. Alleging that the ﬁrst respondent did not pass any orders either in the stay application or in the appeal, the present writ petition is ﬁled seeking a limited relief directing the first respondent to dispose of the appeal expeditiously. After hearing the learned Counsel for the petitioner and the learned Assistant Government Pleader for Civil Supplies, this Court is of the considered opinion that the matter need not be kept pending in this Court, as the appeal itself is pending before the first respondent. It is no doubt true that when a statutory remedy provided, is availed, ordinarily a writ petition would not lie. However, in a case of this nature, when the petitioner sought stay of suspension order, but the competent authority did not pass any orders, it would be certainly arbitrary. Therefore, the Writ Petition is disposed of directing the ﬁrst respondent, namely, Chief Rationing Oﬃcer, Secunderabad, to dispose of the appeal within a period of one week from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. It shall also be open to the petitioner to press for stay before the first respondent. No costs. ____________ (V.V.S.RAO, J) 17.10.2008 Note: Issue C.C today. B/o. vs To 1 The Chief Rationing Officer Secunderabad. 2 The Dist. Supply Officer (City) Hyderabad. 3 The Assist. Supply Officer Circle No.5, Hyderabad. 4 2CCs to G.P for Civil Supplies, High Court of A.P., Hyderabad. 5 2CD copies Form-NIC-OGS/WP{KBJ}