THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE GOPALA KRISHNA TAMADA WRIT PETITION No.17042 of 2009 DATE:20.08.2009 Between: N. Mallesham .. Petitioner and The Revenue Divisional Officer, Medak and another .. Respondents THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE GOPALA KRISHNA TAMADA WRIT PETITION No.17042 of 2009 ORDER: This writ petition is filed by the petitioner seeking a Writ of Mandamus to declare the order passed by 1st respondent, vide proceedings No.J/1349/2009, dated 06.08.2009, as illegal and arbitrary. 2. The case of the petitioner, in brief, is that in the year 2001, he was appointed as a fair price shop dealer of Kadloor village, Tekmal Mandal, Medak District by the Revenue Divisional officer, Medak - 1st respondent. On 14.07.2009 the Tahsildar, Tekmal Mandal - 2nd respondent along with the Revenue Inspector had inspected his shop, basing on a false complaint lodged by a group of people, who are inimical towards him, and enquired into the alleged allegations. Though no irregularities were pointed out by the villagers against him, the 2nd respondent submitted a report to the 1st respondent vide proceedings No.B/3427/2009, dated 16.07.2009, seeking initiation of suitable action against him. Pursuant thereto, the 1st respondent has passed an order, vide proceedings No.J/1349/2009, dated 06.08.2009, suspending his authorisation. The said order is under challenge. 3. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner as well as the learned Government Pleader for Civil Supplies. 4. The learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that neither a notice was issued nor any enquiry was conducted by the 1st respondent before passing the order under challenge, that no period of suspension has been mentioned in the impugned order, and therefore, prays to allow this writ petition. 5. As rightly contended by the learned Government Pleader for Civil Supplies, the petitioner has a right of appeal, against the impugned order. But, in my considered view, the petitioner need not be directed to approach the appellate authority, for the reason that the order impugned in this writ petition is ex facie illegal, and the authorisation of the petitioner can be suspended for a particular period either pending enquiry or after enquiry. From a perusal of the order impugned in this writ petition, it is clear that the authorisation of the petitioner was suspended forever and no time was specified therein. The said order also reveals that the 1st respondent having held a detailed enquiry into the report dated 16.07.2009 submitted by the 2nd respondent, came to the conclusion that the allegations against the petitioner were proved. As stated supra, the suspension can be for a limited period, either during pendency of enquiry or after completion of enquiry. 6. Since the 1st respondent has held a detailed enquiry into the report of the 2nd respondent and came to the conclusion that the irregularities pointed out by the 2nd respondent against the petitioner were true, the 1st respondent could have passed the impugned order for a particular period. But, as the same is missing, this Court is of the view that the impugned order is nonest in the eye of law. 7. In the result, this writ petition is allowed and the order passed by the 1st respondent, by proceedings No.J/1349/2009, dated 06.08.2009, is hereby set aside. However, the 1st respondent is at liberty to pass an appropriate order, basing on the report of the 2nd respondent, in accordance with law. There shall be no order as to costs. _________________________ GOPALA KRISHNA TAMADA, J 20th August, 2009 NOTE: Furnish CC by four days (b/o) CBS THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE GOPALA KRISHNA TAMADA WRIT PETITION No.17042 of 2009 (Allowed) 20th August, 2009 NOTE: Furnish CC by four days (b/o) CBS