The Hon’ble Sri Justice R.Subhash Reddy Writ Petition No.20433 of 2010 Order: Heard the learned Counsel for the petitioner and also the learned Government Pleader for Civil Supplies appearing for the respondents. The petitioner was appointed as the fair price shop dealer of Shop No.17, Sarvareddypally Village, Vangoor Mandal, Mahabubnagar District, vide proceedings No.J/1542/2004, dated 20.08.2004, of respondent No.2- Revenue Divisional Officer, Mahabubnagar. While so, he was issued notice No.M/2058/2010, dated 13.07.2010, to showcause as to why his authorization should not be cancelled for committing certain irregularities viz., (1) that he has not supplied 2.00 quintals of rice to the primary school in Sarvareddypally Village for the purpose of mid day meals; (2) that he is not maintaining the fair price shop in question and that his father viz., S.Anthaiah has been maintaining the same and (3) that he has diverted 8.68 quintals of PDS rice for the month of June, 2010 and 0.46½ kgs of sugar for the month of May and June, 2010 and thereby, violated the provisions of the Andhra Pradesh Public Distribution System (Control) Order, 2008 (for short ‘the Control Order’) and the conditions of authorization granted in his favour. The petitioner has filed a lengthy and detailed explanation to the said showcause notice on 20-07-2010. However, without passing any orders thereon, respondent No.2 has passed the impugned order, dated 06-08-2010, suspending the petitioner’s authorization in respect of the fair price shop in question with immediate effect. Hence the petitioner filed the present Writ Petition. As per Clause 5 (5) of the Control Order, the appointing authority may, at any time, whether at the request of the authorised fair price shop dealer/nominated retailer/hawker or authorised establishment on suo-motu, after making such enquiry as may be deemed necessary and for reasons to be recorded in writing, add to, amend, vary, suspend or cancel the authorization issued or deemed to be issued to him under this clause. A perusal of the impugned order would show that although a reference is made to the explanation offered by the petitioner, no reasons as contemplated under the above-said provision for suspending the petitioner’s authorization are recorded therein. Merely stating that number of complaints have been received from the card holders as regards distribution of essential commodities by the petitioner, the said order of suspension has been passed. In that view of the matter, the impugned order of suspension, dated 06-08-2010, passed by respondent No.2- Revenue Divisional Officer, Mahabubnagar District, is set aside and the matter is remanded to respondent No.2 for consideration afresh. Respondent No.2 is directed to consider the matter afresh in the light of the petitioner’s explanation, dated 20-07-2010, and pass appropriate orders within a period of six weeks from today. Till then, the respondents are directed to supply the essential commodities to the petitioner’s fair price shop and permit the petitioner to distribute the same in terms of the authorization granted in his favour. The Writ Petition is disposed of accordingly. There shall be no order as to costs. _________________ R.Subhash Reddy, J Date: 18th August, 2010 lur