IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction) FRIDAY, THE TWENTY NINETH DAY OF OCTOBER TWO THOUSAND AND FOUR PRESENT THE HON'BLE MS JUSTICE G.ROHINI WRIT PETITION NO : 19901 of 2004 Between: Sri G.Lingaiah, S/o.Sri G.Pedda Saidulu, R/O Thettekunta village, Anumula Mandal, Nalgonda District. ..... PETITIONER AND 1. The Joint Collector (CS), Nalgonda District. 2. The Revenue Divisional officer, Miryalaguda. .....RESPONDENTS Petition under Article 226 of the constitution of India praying that in the circumstances stated in the Affidavit filed herein the High Court may be pleased to issue an appropriate writ, order or direction more particularly one in the nature of writ of Mandamus, set-aside the suspension order of the Respondent in Proc.No.E2// 3121/04 dt. -09-2004 which was issued against the principles of natural justice without giving notice or making any charges against the control order is illegal, without jurisdiction null and void, and consequently direct the Respondent to issue E.C's to the petitioner herein to distribute the same to the cardholders as usual considering the explanation along with material papers. Counsel for the Petitioner: MR.BOLLAM LINGAIAH YADAV Counsel for the Respondents: GP FOR CIVIL SUPPLIES The Court made the following : ORDER: This writ petition is filed aggrieved by the order of the second respondent-Revenue Divisional Officer, Miryalaguda, suspending the authorization of the petitioner pending enquiry into the alleged irregularities. Though the learned Counsel for the petitioner vehemently contended that all the allegations made against the petitioner are false and baseless and therefore the impugned order of suspension is unwarranted and unsustainable, I am not inclined to go into the correctness of the allegations since it is a matter for enquiry by the competent authority after considering the explanation offered by the petitioner and other material, if any, to substantiate the version of the petitioner. The learned counsel for the petitioner states that in pursuance of the show-cause notice issued by the second respondent, the petitioner has already submitted his explanation. In the circumstances, without expressing any opinion on merits, the Writ petition is disposed of with a direction to the second respondent- Revenue Divisional officer, Miryalaguda, to complete the enquiry initiated against the petitioner and to pass appropriate orders in accordance with law, as expeditiously as possible, preferably within a period of two weeks from the date of receipt of this order. No costs. _________ 29.10.2004 sh To 1. The Joint Collector (CS), Nalgonda District. 2. The Revenue Divisional officer, Miryalaguda. 3. 2CCs to the G.P. for Civil Supplies, High Court Buildings, Hyderabad.(OUT). 4. 2CD copies.