The Hon’ble Sri Justice R.Subhash Reddy Writ Petition No.20140 of 2010 Order: In this Writ Petition, the petitioner has questioned proceedings No.Rc.B.238/2010, dated 26-07-2010, passed by the respondent, suspending her authorisation in respect of fair price shop No.40 of Seethanapalli Village of Kaikalur Mandal, granted under the provisions of the A.P.State Public Distribution System (Control) Order, 2008, which is framed under the Essential Commodities Act, 1955 (for short ‘the Act’). It is the case of the petitioner that no reasons have been recorded in the impugned order of suspension and that the same has been passed without conducting any enquiry and without issuing any notice and that the period of suspension has also not been mentioned therein and as such, the same is illegal. I have perused a copy of the impugned order of suspension passed by the respondent. It is stated therein that pursuant to the inspection, statement of the petitioner was recorded and that she stated that she received 800 litres of Kerosene from the wholesale dealer vide Bill No.329, dated 20-06-2010, and that the same was stored in four drums but the same were found missing and that she did not report the same either to the Police or to the authorities concerned. Referring to the said statement, the respondent held that the petitioner has, intentionally, not reported the matter to anybody, which clearly establishes that she has diverted the entire stock of Kerosene to the black market. In view of the above, the allegation made by the petitioner that no reasons were recorded in the impugned order of suspension holds no water. It is also to be noted that apart from the Revenue Divisional Officer, who is the disciplinary authority, the jurisdictional powers are conferred on the Tahsildar also under second proviso to Clause 5 (7) of the Control Order. Though it is not expressly stated that suspension is for a period of 90 days, it has to be construed that the order is restricted only to the maximum period as prescribed in the Control Order itself. Mere non-mentioning of 90 days period by itself is not a ground to declare the impugned order as illegal. For the afore-mentioned reasons, I do not find any merit in this Writ Petition, which is accordingly dismissed. There shall be no order as to costs. _________________ R.Subhash Reddy, J Dated 16th August, 2010 lur