IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction) THURSDAY, THE TWENTY SEVENTH DAY OF NOVEMBER TWO THOUSAND AND EIGHT PRESENT THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE C.V.RAMULU WRIT PETITION NO : 17194 of 2007 Between: B. Satyanarayana S/o.Agaiah Quthbullapur Mandal, Ranga Reddy District. ..... PETITIONER AND 1 The District Collector, Ranga Reddy District. 2 The Joint Collector-I, Ranga Reddy District. 3 The Revenue Divisional Officer, Ranga Reddy East Division, Ranga Reddy District. 4 The Mandal Revenue Officer, Quthbullapur Mandal, Ranga Reddy District. .....RESPONDENTS Petition under Article 226 of the constitution of India praying that in the circumstances stated in the Affidavit filed herein the High Court may be pleased to issue an appropriate writ, or order or direction more particularly one in the nature of writ of Mandamus declaring the order dt.2-7-2007 in Revision Case No. A7/384/2007 passed by the 1st Respondent herein whereby confirming the order, dt. 28-12-2006, in Appeal Case No. A7/404/2006 passed by the 2nd respondent who inturn confirming the order passed by the 3rd Respondent dt.24-10-2006 in proceedings No. C/3648/2006 whereby canceling the authorization of the petitioner to run FP Shop at Dhoolapally Village, Quthbllapur Mandal, Ranga Reddy District, as illegal, arbitrary and pass such other order or orders as this Hon'ble Court may deem fit and proper in the circumstances of the case. Counsel for the Petitioner:MR.A.PRABHAKAR RAO Counsel for the Respondents: GP FOR CIVIL SUPPLIES The Court made the following : THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE C.V.RAMULU WRIT PETITION No.17194 of 2007 ORDER: This writ petition is filed seeking a Mandamus declaring the order, dated 02.07.2007, in Revision Case No.A7/384/2007 passed by the 1st respondent confirming the order, dated 28.12.2006, in Appeal Case No.A7/404/2006 passed by the 2nd respondent confirming the orders passed by the 3rd respondent in proceedings No.C/3648/2006, dated 24.10.2006, cancelling the petitioner’s authorization as a Fair Price Shop of Dhoolapally village, Quthbullapur Mandal, Ranga Reddy District, as arbitrary and illegal. According to the petitioner, he is a Fair Price Shop dealer of Dhoolapally village, Quthbullapur Mandal, Ranga Reddy District, and he has been running the said shop for the last two years without any complaint from any corner, including the cardholders. While that being so, he contested for the post of President of Primary Agricultural Cooperative Society (P.A.C.S.), Dhoolapally village of Quthbullapur Mandal, and was elected as a President of the said P.A.C.S. Thereupon, he was issued a show cause notice, dated 29.09.2006, calling his explanation as to why action should not be initiated against him for violating the provisions as contained in G.O.Ms.No.53, dated 06.10.2003, for which he submitted an explanation, but, however, the Revenue Divisional Officer, Ranga Reddy District, the 3rd respondent, issued proceedings, dated 24.10.2006, canceling the authorization of the petitioner as a Fair Price Shop dealer of Dhoolapally village. Aggrieved thereby, he filed an appeal to the Joint Collector-I, Ranga Reddy District, the 2nd respondent, and the same was dismissed on 28.12.2006 confirming the orders of the 3rd respondent. Challenging the said appeal, he preferred Revision before the District Collector, Hyderabad, the 1st respondent, and it also meted with the same fate. Hence, this writ petition. Sri A.Prabhakar Rao, learned counsel for the petitioner, strenuously contended that the only ground on which the authorization held by the petitioner was sought to be cancelled was that the petitioner, who is working as Fair Price Shop Dealer of Dhoolapally village, is simultaneously holding the post of President of P.A.C.S., Dhoolapally village, in contravention to the provisions as contained in G.O.Ms.No.53, Consumer Affairs of Foods & Civil Supplies (C.S.I.) Department, dated 06.10.2003. He further submits that, firstly, the said G.O. has no application to the present case, since the said G.O. stipulates that a person holding a public office enumerated as Sarpanch, President of Mandal Parishad, Chairman of Zilla Parishad, President of Cooperative Society, Councillors and Chairman of Municipality and Members of Zilla Parishad and Members of Mandal Parishad etc., is not eligible for appointment as a Fair Price Shop dealer, whereas the petitioner was appointed as a Fair Price Shop dealer about 20 years ago and later he was elected as a President of P.A.C.S., and even otherwise the said G.O. is only prospective in operation. Secondly, the appellate authority and the revisional authority have not heard the petitioner properly and dismissed the appeal and the revision in gross violation of the principles of natural justice. Therefore, the orders impugned are liable to be set aside. Learned Government Pleader appearing for the respondents stated that Clause 12 (ii) of G.O.Ms.No.53, dated 06.10.2003, clearly says that every Fair Price Shop dealer should give an undertaking to the appointing authority concerned that he/she will relinquish the dealership, if he/she is elected to any public office and, moreover the said G.O. is retrospective in operation and applicable to the case of the petitioner as he is continuing as Fair Price Shop Dealer under the provisions of the Andhra Pradesh State Public Distribution System (Control) Order, 2001. Further, the respondents have not violated the principles of natural justice, since they afforded an opportunity of hearing to the petitioner before passing the orders impugned. Therefore, there is no illegality in the impugned orders warranting interference by this Court. I have given my earnest consideration to the respective submissions made by the learned counsel on either side and perused the impugned orders and other material made available on record. Admittedly, the petitioner is a Fair Price Shop dealer of Dhoolapally village, Qutubullapur Mandal, Ranga Reddy District, and he was elected as a President of P.A.C.S, Dhoolapally village and, as such, holding the said post from the date of his being elected. Thereupon, a show cause notice was issued to the petitioner directing him to explain the reasons as to why his dealership should not be cancelled forthwith on the ground of contravening the provisions of the aforesaid G.O. Further, it may be noticed that a Fair Price Shop dealer will not be able to do justice, if he is elected as a President of P.A.C.S. or vice-versa. In the circumstances, I am of the opinion that clause 12 (ii) of G.O.Ms.No.53, dated 06.10.2003, squarely applies to the case of the petitioner. Therefore, viewed from any angle, issuance of show cause notice, dated 29.09.2006, and, thereupon, passing of the order, dated 24.10.2006, by the disciplinary authority cancelling the authorization of the petitioner, as confirmed by the appellate and the revisional authority by orders dated 28.12.2006 and 02.07.2007 respectively, cannot be said to be arbitrary and illegal. The writ petition is, accordingly, dismissed. No costs. However, the order, dated 24.10.2006, canceling the petitioner’s authorization shall not be given effect to for a period of two weeks from today. The petitioner if at all intends to resign the post of President of P.A.C.S., Dhoolapally village, he shall submit his resignation to the authority concerned and, on submission of such resignation, the respondents may consider the case of the petitioner in continuing him as a Fair Price Shop dealer of Dhoolapally village, Qutubullapur Mandal, Ranga Reddy District. _____________ C.V.RAMULU,J 27.11.2008 v v