HON’BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE SHRI ANIL R. DAVE AND HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE GOPALA KRISHNA TAMADA W.A. No.112 of 2008 Date:14-2-2008 Between: Tella Anjaiah. …. Appellant. and The District Collector (Civil Supplies) Prakasham District, Ongole and others. … Respondents. :JUDGMENT: Per Anil R. Dave, CJ Being aggrieved by the order dated 17.9.2007 passed by the learned Single Judge in Writ Petition No.10122 of 2007, the original petitioner has filed this appeal. Facts discloses that the authorization of the appellant-original petitioner, who was running a fair price shop under the public distribution system, was initially suspended by Respondent No.3 -- Revenue Divisional Officer, Ongole by order dated 14.9.2004, but on consideration of his explanation, Respondent No.3 by order dated 25.10.2005 had restored his authorization imposing a fine of Rs.300/-. It appears that on appeal by the card holders, Respondent No.2 – Joint Collector, Ongole by order dated 12.1.2006 set aside the order of Respondent No.3, against which, the appellant-original petitioner filed a revision application before Respondent No.1 -District Collector, Ongole, which was also dismissed by order dated 6.1.2007. Aggrieved by the same, the appellant has filed the writ petition, which has been dismissed by the learned single Judge. Upon perusal of the record, it is clear that the appellant was found to be involved in several irregularities in the distribution of essential commodities. Concurrent findings of the authorities are to the effect that the appellant was not distributing the essential commodities properly and that he was selling the goods at higher prices and thereby he had committed serious irregularities. It is found that the essential commodities like rice, kerosene and sugar were being sold at higher prices. Rice, which was supposed to be sold at Rs.5.25, the appellant was selling at Rs.5.50 per K.G. Kerosene which was supposed to be sold at Rs.9.50 per litre, the appellant was found to be selling at Rs.10/- per litre, whereas sugar which was to be sold at Rs.13.50/- per kilogram he was found to be selling at Rs.14/- per kilogram. Thus, the purpose for which license was granted to the appellant was being misused by him. Upon hearing the learned advocate and looking to the concurrent findings of fact arrived at by the respective authorities, we are of the view that the matter does not require any interference by this Court. The appeal, therefore, fails and it is accordingly dismissed with no order as to costs. ANIL R. DAVE, CJ 14th February, 2008 GOPALA KRISHNA TAMADA, J vtv