THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE P.S.NARAYANA WRIT PETITION No.248 OF 2008 Between: Smt.D.Bhagyamma, W/o.D.Rama Subbadu, Aged about 45 years, F.P.Shop No.4, Manchalakatta village, Gadevemula Mandal, Kurnool District. …Petitioner AND The Joint Collector, Kurnool, Kurnool District and others. ..Respondents. THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE P.S.NARAYANA WRIT PETITION No.248 OF 2008 ORDER: This Court issued Rule Nisi on 08.01.2008. Counter affidavit is filed. Heard Sri Raghuveer, learned Counsel representing the petitioner and the learned Assistant Government Pleader for Civil Supplies. The writ Petition is filed for a Writ of Mandamus to declare the action of the 2nd respondent in issuing the proceedings in Rc(A) 2581/2007, dated 25.12.2007, suspending the authorization of the Fair Price Shop of the petitioner, as illegal, arbitrary and against the natural justice and consequently, to direct the respondents to supply the commodities pending enquiry before the 2nd respondent and pass such other orders. It is stated that the petitioner has been functioning as a permanent dealer of Fair Price Shop from past several years without any complaint from the card holders or from the appointing authority at any point of time. It is stated that the 2nd respondent by his proceedings Rc(A) 2581/2007, dated 25.12.2007, suspended authorization of the petitioner’s F.P.Shop pending enquiry, stating that the 3rd respondent inspected his F.P. Shop No.4 of Manchala Katta village on 06.12.2007 and reported that there are no variations and irregularities committed by the petitioner and submitted the key register with coupons of October 2007 and November 2007. The 2nd respondent in the impugned proceedings stated that when compared the coupons with key register, some coupons are double numbered with the same name and alleged that total 21 and 23 coupons were duplicated in the months of October, 2007 and November, 2007 respectively. It was further alleged that the petitioner had not distributed essential commodities to some coupons during the month of September, 2007. It is also stated that every month, the petitioner had been supplying the commodities to all the card holders and collecting the coupons from them. The respondents- authorities are not supplying the coupons to the card holders and are directing the petitioner to supply the commodities by entering in the acquaintance register for those who could not produce coupons. On their directions, the petitioner is supplying the commodities. Every month the coupons are being submitted to the authorities and they are endorsing the same. Now for the best known reasons to the respondents are making allegations that for the months of September, October and November some coupons are doubled. Further it is averred that aggrieved by the orders of the 2nd respondent, the petitioner preferred an appeal before the 1st respondent along with stay application and no orders had been passed. In such circumstances, the petitioner approached this Court praying for appropriate relief. In the counter affidavit, sworn to by the Revenue Divisional Officer, Nandyal, it is averred that Smt.Bhagyamma, the petitioner herein, is the fair Price Shop Dealer of Manchalakatta Village of Gadivemula Mandal. On receipt of report from the Tahasildar, Gadivemula, the coupons for the month of October, 2007 and November, 2007 have been verified with key register of the village and found that rice was distributed to 21 duplicate coupons for the month of October, 2007 and 23 for the month of November, 2007 and the F.P. Shop dealer distributed rice of 6.73 Qts to the duplicate coupons. For the above and for other irregularities the authorization of the petitioner had been suspended pending enquiry. It is further stated that on receipt of report from the Tahasildar, Gadivemula the coupons for the month of October, 2007 and November, 2007 have been compared with key register of Manchalakatta Village and found that the F.P. Shop dealer (petitioner) had distributed P.D.S. Rice of 3.38+3.35, total 6.73 Qts to 21+23=44 duplicate coupons and the petitioner had also not distributed rice of 211 K.Gs and Kerosene Oil of 33 litres for the month of September, 2007 to the card holders and committed irregularities and further the petitioner violated the A.P.S.P.D.S. Control Order 2001. Hence, the authorization of the petitioner - F.P.Shop dealer had been suspended pending enquiry. It is also stated that the coupons produced by the Tahasildar, which were collected from the F.P. Shop dealer had been compared with key Register of the village and found that the F.P. Shop dealer had issued commodities to the duplicate coupons with same number and same name of the shop for the month of October, 2007 and November 2007. There are no directions with regard to issue of commodities to the cardholders without coupons and there are specific directions to the F.P. Shop dealer to issue commodities only after collecting coupons from the cardholders. The authorization was suspended pending enquiry for the irregularities committed by the petitioner. The petitioner had opportunity to represent her case before the Revenue Divisional Officer, Nandyal at the time of enquiry and if aggrieved by the order, the petitioner can avail the alternative remedy of preferring an appeal before the Joint Collector, Kurnool. Further it is stated that the petitioner has every right to prefer an appeal before the Joint Collector, Kurnool to represent her case. As there are sufficient grounds that she the petitioner committed irregularities in distribution of essential commodities to the cardholders, the authorization of the Fair Price Shop of the petitioner had been suspended and her case will be finalized after completion of enquiry by giving reasonable opportunity to her. It is also stated that after suspension orders, alternative arrangements had been made and an in charge, dealer of shop No.3 Manchalakatta village, had been entrusted with for distribution of essential commodities as temporary measure. Whatever may be the merits and demerits of the matter, inasmuch as it is stated that an appeal had been preferred before the 1st respondent and the said appeal is pending disposal, let the 1st respondent dispose of the appeal within a period of four weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. However, since it is pointed out that the allegations are trivial in nature, let the 2nd respondent complete the enquiry within a period of four weeks and till the enquiry is completed by the 2nd respondent, the respondents are directed not to make any temporary appointment to the F.P. Shop No.4, Manchalakatta Village, Gadevemula Mandal, Kurnool District. The Writ Petition is accordingly disposed of. No costs. ___________________ P.S.NARAYANA, J. Date: 01.02.2008. GS