THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE NOUSHAD ALI WRIT PETITION No.28053 OF 2008 BETWEEN: B. Rajendra Prasad S/o. late B. Subbanna Fair Price Shop Dealer, Shop No.14, Door No.3/39, Ward NO.3, Sivalingampillai Street, Nagarajupeta, Kadapa City and District. …. PETITIONER And 1. The Government of Andhra Pradesh rep. by its District Collector, Kadapa, Kadapa District and others. …. RESPONDENTS Counsel for petitioners: Sri V.R. Reddy Kovvuri Counsel for respondents: G.P. for Civil Supplies. The Court made the following order: ORDER: The petitioner, a Fair Price Shop dealer in respect of shop No.14, Door No.3/39, Ward No.3, Nagarajupeta, Kadapa, has filed this writ petition assailing the proceedings of the 3rd respondent, viz., the Revenue Divisional Officer, Kadapa, in Ref.No.C/1307/2008, dated 13.08.2008, keeping his authorization under suspension, as illegal. The Tahsildar, Kadapa, along with Mandal Revenue Inspector and Food Inspector, inspected the Fair Price Shop of the petitioner on 20.06.2008 and found certain variations in the stock on ground and with reference to the entries in the concerned registers. Based on the report submitted by the Tahsildar, Kadapa, the 3rd respondent passed the impugned order. Heard learned counsel for both the parties. The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner has not committed any irregularity, and even if the allegations are taken on its face value, the irregularities are trivial in nature and the same do not warrant suspension of authorization pending enquiry. The learned Government Pleader submits that the 3rd respondent has initiated enquiry and the petitioner can as well defend his case in the said enquiry. I am not inclined to express any opinion on the merits of the case. This Court while admitting the writ petition by order in W.P.M.P.No.36764 of 2008 dated 23.12.2008 suspended the operation of the impugned order. It is stated that by virtue of the said order, the petitioner has been running the shop. That being so any disturbance at this point of time would cause dislocation of distribution of commodities causing inconvenience to the public. Instead, it is appropriate that the enquiry itself should be completed within a time frame. In the circumstances, the 3rd respondent is directed to complete the enquiry as early as possible, preferably within a period of eight weeks from the date of receipt a copy of this order. In the mean while, status quo obtaining as on today shall be maintained during the pendency of the enquiry. The writ petition is disposed of as above. There shall be no order as to costs. ________________ NOUSHAD ALI, J. 12th November, 2010 Js.