HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE R. SUBHASH REDDY WRIT PETITION No.18187 of 2009 Date : 04.11.2011 Between : P. Ramesh Babu. …..Petitioner And The Revenue Divisional Officer, Kandukuru, Prakasam District & another. …..Respondents HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE R. SUBHASH REDDY WRIT PETITION No.18187 of 2009 ORDER : The petitioner was appointed as a temporary dealer for authorized fair price shop for distribution of essential commodities in Ravulakollu village of Ponnaluru Mandal in Prakasam District, vide Proceedings No.D.Dis.F.1135/2004, dated 22.06.2004. When supplies were stopped on the authorization of the petitioner, he approached this Court by filing this writ petition on 27.08.2009, and at the stage of admission, this Court granted interim directions on 28.08.2009, directing the respondents to supply essential commodities on the authroisation of petitioner. Mainly, it is the case of the petitioner that without passing any order either suspending or terminating the dealership granted to him, there is no reason for stopping supplies to his fair price shop. In the counter affidavit filed on behalf of respondents, while denying the allegations made by the petitioner, it is stated that on credible information from the cardholders of Ravulakollu village that the petitioner had stored some PDS rice and kerosene oil in his house, the Enforcement Deputy Tahsildar, Singarayakonda, along with the Food Inspector, Kandukoor, proceeded to the shop of the petitioner and seized the stock of 22.5 quintals of PDS rice and 400 litres of kerosene oil from the house of the petitioner, which is on the back side of the fair price shop. It is stated that on such seizure, proceedings were initiated under Section 6 of the Essential commodities Act and he was fined 100% equivalent to the stocks not shown in the register. In the counter affidavit filed on behalf of respondents, there is no reference to the action taken on the temporary dealership granted to the petitioner. Though the petitioner is a temporary dealer, if he is not undertaking the distribution of essential commodities in proper manner, it is open for the respondents to take steps in accordance with the Control Order, but without passing any order, while the authorization granted to the petitioner is in force, there is no reason to stop supplies on the authorization held by the petitioner. For the aforesaid reasons, as it is stated that pursuant to interim orders of this Court, supplies are being made to the petitioner’s shop, I deem it appropriate to dispose of the writ petition, directing the respondents to continue supplies on the authorization held by the petitioner, so long he holds valid authorization. However, it is made clear that if there are any complaints or allegations against the petitioner, it is open for the respondents to take appropriate action on his authorization. It is also made clear that this order will not preclude the respondents from taking steps for appointment of fair price shop dealer on permanent basis. Subject to above directions, this writ petition is disposed of. No order as to costs. ______________________ R. SUBHASH REDDY, J 4th November 2011 ajr