THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE V.V.S.RAO WRIT PETITION No.2126 of 2009 Dated:06.04.2010 Between: P.Maldakal. …Petitioner and The Joint Collector, Kurnool, And others. …Respondents THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE V.V.S.RAO WRIT PETITION No.2126 of 2009 ORDER: The petitioner is a dealer of Fair Price Shop No.17 of Pudicherla Village of Orvakal Mandal in Kurnool District. By proceedings dated 25.12.2008 respondent No.2 suspended the authorization pending enquiry. Assailing the same, the petitioner filed the instant writ petition. This Court admitted writ petition on 06.02.2009. By order of the same date in W.P.M.P.No.2695 of 2009 this Court suspended the impugned order. Respondent No.2 has moved W.V.M.P.No.2781 of 2009 for vacating the interim order. As the short question is involved, the matter itself is heard finally. In the counter affidavit it is stated that against the order of suspension of respondent No.2, dated 25.12.2008, the petitioner preferred an appeal before respondent No.1, and when the same is pending, he filed the instant writ petition. The petitioner has not filed any reply affidavit denying the allegation that he filed appeal before the Joint Collector. Indeed the same is not even disclosed in the affidavit accompanying the writ petition. This Court has a feeling that the petitioner suppressed the fact to obtain interim order from this Court. In such cases discretion is not exercised. Even otherwise, it is well settled that the petitioner cannot simultaneously avail the statutory appeal and extraordinary remedy under Article 226 of the Constitution of India (See Bombay Region Development Authority v Gokul Patel[1]). The Writ Petition is, therefore, disposed of observing that respondent No.1 may dispose of the appeal – if not already disposed of; within a period of four weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. There shall be no order as to costs. _____________ (V.V.S.RAO, J) 06.04.2010 vs [1] (1995) 1 SCC 642