THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE R.SUBHASH REDDY WRIT PETITION No.26917 of 2007 ORDER: Petitioner is the authorized fair price shop dealer for distribution of essential commodities to the cardholders in Hothi ‘B’ Village, Zaheerabad Mandal, Medak District. In this Writ Petition, he has questioned order, dated 30.11.2007 passed by the respondent – Tahsildar, Zaheerabad Mandal, Medak District, in proceedings No.A/1678/2007, cancelling his fair price shop authorization. At the stage of admission, this Court has suspended the impugned order. It is stated that the petitioner is being continued as a fair price shop dealer. Mainly, it is the case of the petitioner that without conducting any enquiry and without giving him any prior notice and opportunity of hearing, the impugned order is passed. It is also his case that there is no power or jurisdiction for the Tahsildar to cancel the authorization issued under the provisions of the Andhra Pradesh State Public Distribution System Control Order, 2001. In the counter-affidavit filed by the respondent, while denying various allegations of the petitioner, it is stated that as there was a complaint from Hothi ‘B’ villagers on 26.11.2007, the Mandal Revenue Inspector, Zaheerabad, inspected the fair price shop of the petitioner and based on his report, the respondent passed the impugned order. It is also stated that from the report submitted by the Mandal Revenue Inspector, it is clear that the petitioner has committed malpractices, as such, action was taken by the respondent in terms of the orders passed in G.O.Ms.No.47, dated 06.10.2007. I have also perused the impugned order, counter-affidavit and G.O.Ms.Nos.8 and 47, dated 01.02.2006 and 06.10.2007. Though there is a specific allegation in the affidavit filed in support of the writ petition that the impugned order is not preceded by any notice and opportunity of hearing to the petitioner, there is no denial of such allegation in the counter-affidavit. The respondent pleaded that he is empowered to pass the impugned order in view of the power conferred under the aforesaid Government Orders. But, a reading of G.O.Ms.Nos.8 and 47 clearly indicates that the limited power of suspension is conferred on the Tahsildar for a period of 90 days but not beyond that. There is no power to the Tahsildar as per the said G.O.s and the provisions of the Andhra Pradesh State Public Distribution System Control Order, 2001 to cancel the fair price shop authorization of a dealer. In any event, just in view of the allegations, based on the report submitted by the Mandal Revenue Inspector, without giving any notice and opportunity of hearing to the petitioner, the impugned order should not have been passed cancelling his fair price shop authorization. Not only the impugned order is without jurisdiction but also in gross violation of the principles of natural justice and contrary to the procedure prescribed under law. For the aforesaid reasons, the impugned order is hereby quashed and the Writ Petition is allowed. No order as to costs. ______________________ R.SUBHASH REDDY, J 1st NOVEMBER, 2011. kvni