THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE R.SUBHASH REDDY WRIT PETITION No.24437 of 2007 ORDER: Petitioner is a dealer of fair price shop No.27 in Vizianagaram Town. On the allegation that he was not running the shop and he has handed over the same to one unauthorized person, proceedings were initiated for cancellation of his fair price shop authorization. In response to show cause notice, dated 02.12.2004 issued to him by the fourth respondent - Tahsildar, Vizianagaram in Rc.No.2689/2004, he submitted an explanation stating that he is poor, he used to borrow money from one G.Nageswara Rao on weekly interest basis and Smt. Chandrakumari, being the wife of G.Nageswara Rao, acknowledged the said show cause notice. After considering such explanation, the third respondent – Revenue Divisional Officer, Vizianagaram, by order, dated 02.05.2005 passed in Rc.No.2689/04 H, cancelled the fair price shop authorization of the petitioner by recording findings that the explanation offered by him is not convincing and he is working in a wine shop and thus, violated the conditions of Form-II authorization and para 12 (xiii) of the guidelines mentioned in G.O.Ms.No.53, Consumer Affairs, Food and Civil Supplies (C.S.I.) Department, dated 06.10.2003. As against the said order, he carried the matter in appeal before the second respondent – Joint Collector and Additional District Magistrate, Vizianagaram, and further, revision before the first respondent – District Collector, Vizianagaram, but he was unsuccessful. Hence, this Writ Petition. In this Writ Petition, it is contended by Sri Balaji Medamalli, learned counsel for the petitioner that in spite of valid explanation offered by the petitioner, the third respondent passed order, dated 02.05.2005 cancelling his fair price shop authorization. It is submitted that no cardholders were examined before passing the cancellation order by the third respondent. In this case, it is to be noticed that the notice issued to the petitioner was received by Smt. Chandrakumari, Wife of G.Nageswara Rao. If the fair price shop is being run by the petitioner, there is no reason for accepting the notice sent to him by Smt.Chandrakumari, who is the wife of G.Nageswara Rao. The primary authority has recorded findings that the explanation offered by the petitioner is totally unconvincing and he is working in a wine shop. Further, the appellate authority in his order, dated 05.02.2006, has recorded a finding that at the time of inspection made by the Civil Supplies Deputy Tahsildar, Sri G.Nageswara Rao was found in the shop but not the petitioner. From the above, it is clear that though the petitioner was appointed as the fair price shop dealer, he is not running the shop and he transferred the same to a third party, who is running the shop in his name, as such, merely because the cardholders are not examined, by itself is no ground to set aside the cancellation order passed by the primary authority. For the aforesaid reasons, in view of the concurrent findings recorded by all the authorities, I am of the opinion that there is no illegality, which warrants interference by this Court in the impugned orders passed by the primary, appellate and revisional authorities. The Writ Petition is devoid of merit and it is accordingly dismissed. No order as to costs. ______________________ R.SUBHASH REDDY, J 1st NOVEMBER, 2011. kvni