IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction) TUESDAY, THE TWENTY FIRST DAY OF OCTOBER TWO THOUSAND AND EIGHT PRESENT THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE V.V.S.RAO WRIT PETITION No.19705 of 2005 Between: Rami Reddy Ramachandrudu, S/o. Surya Chandrudu, Fhakruddinpalem Village, Pithapuram Mandal, E.Godavari Dist. ..... PETITIONER AND 1 The District Collector, kakinada, E.Godavari Dist. 2 The Joint Collector, Kakinada, East Godavari District. 3 The Revenue Divisional Officer, Kakinada, East Godavari District. 4 The Civil Supplies Deputy Thasildar, Pithapuram, E.Godavari Dist. .....RESPONDENTS Petition under Article 226 of the constitution of India praying that in the circumstances stated in the Aﬃdavit ﬁled herein the High Court will be pleased to issue a writ of mandamus, or any other appropriate writ or order or direction, to declare the order of the 3rd respondent made in Ref; G/383/2002 dated 27-3-2003 cancelling authorisation of the petitioner as Fair price shop Dealer of Fakruddinpalem Village of Pithapuram Mandal, as conﬁrmed by the 2nd respondent in his proceedings in Dis. V10/Cs/398/2003 dated 30-1-2004 as conﬁrmed by the 1st respondent in Ref; V10/CS/283/2004 dated 16-5-205 as illegal, arbitrary and unconstitutional and pass such other order or orders as this Hon'ble court may deem fit and proper. Counsel for the Petitioner: SRI K.SURESH REDDY Counsel for the Respondents: GP FOR CIVIL SUPPLIES The Court made the following : THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE V.V.S.RAO WRIT PETITION No.19705 of 2005 ORDER: The petitioner is a Fair Price Shop (FPS) dealer of Fhakruddinpalem Village of Pithapuram Mandal in East Godavari District. The Revenue Divisional Oﬃcer (RDO), third respondent herein, initiated action under the relevant clause of the Andhra Pradesh State Public Distribution System Control Order, 2001 (Control Order, for brevity), on receipt of information that the petitioner committed irregularities in distribution of Food for Work (FFW) rice. A show cause notice dated 24.10.2002 was issued making two allegations: that the dealer has not followed the instructions of the higher authorities duly issuing rice on the coupons relating to Gollaprolu Mandal instead of Pithapuram Mandal and thus he violated condition No.11 of the Control Order, and that the dealer has not followed the instructions of the higher authorities i.e., not handed over the mid day meal rice to the Civil Supplies Deputy Tahasildar, Pithapuram, at the time of seizing of stocks. The petitioner submitted a detailed explanation on 01.11.2002. After considering the same, the third respondent passed orders on 27.03.2003 cancelling the authorization. In his appeal as well as the revision the petitioner was unsuccessful before the second respondent and the ﬁrst respondent. Therefore, he ﬁled the instant writ petition seeking a writ of mandamus declaring the action of third respondent as conﬁrmed by respondent Nos.2 and 1 cancelling the authorization as illegal and arbitrary. This Court heard learned Counsel for the petitioner and the learned Assistant Government Pleader for Civil Supplies. Petitioner’s Counsel submits that in the absence of allegations of misappropriation, the drastic punishment of cancellation of authorization is not warranted. He submits that instead of supplying rice against coupons of executive agencies of Pithapuram Mandal, the petitioner supplied to coupon holders covered by executive agencies in Gollaprolu Mandal, and it was not intentional. He secondly, submits that rice meant for mid day meal scheme was not supplied immediately, but it was handed over after lapse of ﬁve months, and therefore, authorities ought to have taken a lenient view. The original authority recorded ﬁndings against the petitioner holding that though the petitioner is supposed to issue rice within Pithapuram Mandal, he issued rice on the coupons produced by mandal executive agencies in Gollaprolu Mandal intentionally and with the collusion of people of Gollaprolu Mandal. Similarly, admittedly, petitioner supplied rice under mid day meal scheme after lapse of ﬁve months. Whether these two lapses are in contravention of the Control Order and conditions of authorization? The authorization to run a FPS is subject to authorization issued to a dealer. Inter alia, it provides that the authorized FPS dealer shall follow the instructions issued by the Oﬃcials. When instructions were issued while supplying 543.10 quintals of rice for distribution under FFW programme in Pithapuram Mandal, it is rather surprising that the petitioner distributed the rice in Gollaprolu Mandal, which itself is in violation of conditions of authorization. Secondly, mid day meal in schools is taken up to provide meals during lunch hour for the children. If the mid day meal rice is not supplied within the stipulated time, and the same is delayed, it would certainly result in causing failure of the scheme besides putting young school children to hardship. Therefore, this Court is convinced that the original authority as well as appellate/revisional authorities correctly came to the conclusion and cancelled the authorization. The Writ Petition is devoid of any merits, and the same is accordingly dismissed with costs. ____________ (V.V.S.RAO, J) 21.10.2008 vs To 1 The District Collector, kakinada, E.Godavari Dist. 2 The Joint Collector, Kakinada, East Godavari District. 3 The Revenue Divisional Officer, Kakinada, East Godavari District. 4 The Civil Supplies Deputy Thasildar, Pithapuram, E.Godavari Dist. 5 2CCs to G.P for Civil Supplies, High Court of A.P., Hyderabad. 6 2CD copies Form-NIC-OGS/WP{CTMP}