IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE OF ANDHRA PRADESH: HYDERABAD TUESDAY, THE TWENTY THIRD DAY OF FEBRUARY TWO THOUSAND AND TEN PRESENT: THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE R. SUBHASH REDDY WRIT PETITION No.3819 OF 2010 BETWEEN: K. Keshavulu S/o. K. Yadagiri …. Petitioner AND The Revenue Divisional Officer, East Division, R.R. District at Malakunta Road, Goshamahal, Hyderabad and Others …. Respondents THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE R. SUBHASH REDDY WRIT PETITION No.3819 OF 2010 ORDER: The petitioner has filed this writ petition seeking to declare the action of the respondents for non supply of the essential commodities to his Fair Price Shop at Rachuluru Village, Kandkuru Mandal, R.R. District, pursuant to the panchanama, dated 08-02-2010, as illegal and arbitrary, and consequently, to set aside the Memo No.C/76/2010, dated 16-02-2010, issued by respondent No.2. 2. The petitioner is the authorized Fair Price Shop Dealer of shop No.24 of Rachuluru Village and as such, his appointment is covered by the provisions under the Andhra Pradesh State Public Distribution System (Control) Order 2008 (for short ‘the Control Order 2008’). 3. On 08-02-2010, the Deputy Tahsildar, Kandukur, R.R. District - respondent No.3 has inspected the business premises of the petitioner and seized certain stocks. Thereafter, he filed a report, alleging mis-use of the commodities supplied to the petitioner’s shop and variations in the stocks, before the Joint Collector, the Revenue Divisional Officer, East Division, R.R. District - respondent No.1 and the Tahsildar, Kandukur Mandal, R.R. District – respondent No.2, to take further steps. Then, respondent No.2 issued Memo No.C/76/2010, dated 16-2-2010, giving in-charge of the petitioner’s Fair Price Shop to the Dealer of Fair Price Shop No.2 of Utlapally. 4. At the stage of admission, the learned Assistant Government Pleader, appearing for Government Pleader for Civil Supplies, on instructions, submitted that as on today, the petitioner holds the valid authorization and that the authorization granted to him is neither suspended nor cancelled. However, it is stated that steps are being taken to initiate disciplinary action against him and to pass appropriate orders thereon. 5. As on date, when the authorization of the petitioner is neither suspended nor cancelled, there is no reason for passing the orders dated 16-2-2010 by respondent No.2 giving in-charge of the petitioner’s shop to the dealer of Fair Price Shop No.2. While, it is open to the respondents to take disciplinary action and to make alternative arrangements temporarily, pending enquiry, in view of the subsistence of the petitioner’s authorization, no temporary arrangements could have been made by respondent No.2. 6. In that view of the matter, the order passed by respondent No.2 in Memo No.C/76/2010 dated 16-2-2010, is hereby quashed. There shall be a direction to the respondents to supply the commodities to the Fair Price Shop No.2, Rachuluru Village, Kandukuru Mandal, R.R. District, held by the petitioner, so long as his authorization is valid. 7. However, it is made clear that if any further allegations are made against the petitioner in the course of his Fair Price Shop dealership, it is always open to the respondents to pass appropriate orders in accordance with the provisions of the Control Order 2008. 8. Subject to the above directions, the Writ Petition is disposed of. There shall be no order as to costs. _____________________ R. SUBHASH REDDY, J February 23, 2010. Note: Issue C.C. in two days. (B/o.) KTL.