IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction) TUESDAY, THE FIFTH DAY OF OCTOBER TWO THOUSAND AND TEN PRESENT THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE R. SUBHASH REDDY WRIT PETITION No.11842 of 2010 BETWEEN Ram Sanjeeevaiah. ... PETITIONER AND The Revenue Divisional Officer, Jagtial and another. ...RESPONDENTS Counsel for the Petitioner: MR. K. VENUMADHAV Counsel for the Respondents: GP FOR CIVIL SUPPLIES The Court made the following order: ORDER: Petitioner is a fair price shop dealer of Shop No.2613 in Venugumatla Village, Gollapally Mandal, Karimnagar District. In this writ petition, the petitioner questions the impugned show cause notice dated 15.05.2010 and consequential suspension of his authorization on the same day. The appointment and disciplinary proceedings are governed by the Andhra Pradesh State Public Distribution System (Control) Order, 2008 framed under the Essential Commodities Act, 1955. 2. The Deputy Tahsildar (Civil Supplies), Jagtial after making inspection seems to have submitted a report dated 07.05.2010 alleging that the petitioner illegally stored 3.32 quintals of rice and 396 litres of kerosene, which was meant for public distribution. Thus, he has violated the conditions of authorization. Based on the said report, the Revenue Divisional Officer, Jagtial, has initiated disciplinary action against the petitioner and issued show cause notice dated 15.05.2010 in proceedings No.B/1204/2010 calling upon the petitioner to file an explanation as to why authorization granted to him should not be cancelled. However, on the very same ground, as an interim measure, the authorization granted to the petitioner was suspended pending enquiry. It is stated that the petitioner has already filed an explanation on 18/19.05.2010. 3. This Court while issuing notice before admission on 26.05.2010 suspended the impugned order. Though counter affidavit is not filed, it is submitted by the learned Government Pleader that the enquiry is pending before the RDO. 4. Taking into account the order passed by this Court on 26.05.2010 and as it is not disputed that the petitioner is continuing as a dealer now by virtue of the interim order of this Court, I deem it appropriate to direct the first respondent to complete the enquiry by considering the explanation filed by the petitioner on 18/19.05.2010 pursuant to the show cause notice and pass appropriate final orders as expeditiously as possible preferably within a period of two (2) months from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. There shall be a further direction that the impugned order of suspension issued against the petitioner shall remain suspended till appropriate final orders are passed and communicated to the petitioner. Subject to the above directions, the writ petition is disposed of. There shall be no order as to costs. __________________ R. SUBHASH REDDY, J October 5, 2010 DSK