THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE R.SUBHASH REDDY WRIT PETITION No.24744 of 2008 ORDER: This Writ Petition is filed with the prayer, which reads as under: “For the reasons stated in the accompanying affidavit, it is prayed that this Hon’ble Court may be pleased to issue writ order or direction more particularly one in the nature of writ of Mandamus declare the impugned order dt 10-10-2008 passed in RP No.3/2008 passed by the 1st respondent confirming the orders of the 2nd respondent vide FPSAP No.8/2007 G8 dt 13-6-2008 and the 3rd respondent in proc Rc No.2304/06 dt 28- 5-2007 as illegal, arbitrary and against the principles of natural justice and consequently set aside the same.” Petitioner is a fair price shop dealer of V.P.Rega Village in Garividi Mandal of Vizianagaram District. On receiving a complaint against him that he was selling essential commodities to the cardholders at higher rates and with less measurements than prescribed, the fourth respondent – Tahsildar, Garividi Mandal, Vizianagaram District, submitted a report to the third respondent – Revenue Divisional Officer, Vizianagaram. Proceedings for cancellation of authorisation of the petitioner to run the fair price shop were initiated. Based upon the same, two charges were framed against the petitioner and the same reads as under: “Charge 1:- That he being a responsible F.P.Shop Dealer of V.P.Rega has been selling Ecs at higher rates i.e. Rice @ 5.50 AAY rice @ 3.25, K.Oil @ 10.00 and Sugar @ 14.50 and thereby violated condition of Authorisation. Charge 2:- That he being responsible F.P.Shop dealer of V.P.Rega has been distributing Ecs to the card holders with less measurements and thereby violated condition of F.P.Shop Authorisation.” The petitioner submitted explanation but without recording any specific reason, merely stating that he has been selling the essential commodities at higher rates and with lesser measurements, the third respondent - primary authority has cancelled the fair price shop authorisation granted to the petitioner, vide proceedings in Rc.No.2304/2006, II, dated 28.05.2007. On an appeal filed by the petitioner, the appellate authority/second respondent – Joint collector, Vizianagaram, while noticing that in a statement recorded from Sri Adapaka Appala Naidu, Son of Sanyasi Naidu and 45 others of V.P.Rega Village, by the Inspecting Officers, it is mentioned that the petitioner was selling essential commodities to the cardholders at higher rates and with lesser quantities, dismissed the appeal by his order bearing F.P.S.A.P.No.8/2007, dated 13.06.2008. The revisional authority/first respondent – District Collector, Vizianagaram, vide his order in R.P.No.3/2008, dated 10.10.2008, confirmed the said order of the appellate authority. In the order of the revisional authority, it is mentioned that the Deputy Tahsildar (C.S), Garividi, recorded the statements of the cardholders. The impugned orders are questioned mainly on the ground that though no valid reasons have been assigned by the primary authority in cancelling the authorisation of the petitioner to run the fair price shop, the appellate and revisional authorities confirmed the same. It is submitted that ex parte enquiry conducted by the Deputy Tahsildar is the sole basis for passing the impugned orders. On the other hand, it is submitted by the learned Assistant Government Pleader for Civil Supplies appearing for the respondents that as it was proved in the enquiry that the petitioner was selling the essential commodities at higher rates and with lesser quantities than the entitlement of the cardholders, the impugned order of cancelling his authorisation is passed and the same is confirmed by the appellate and revisional authorities, as such, there are no grounds to interfere with the impugned orders. I have heard the learned counsel for both sides and perused the impugned orders passed by the primary, appellate and revisional authorities. A perusal of order, dated 28.05.2007 passed by the third respondent indicates that there is no specific reason at all to cancel the fair price shop authorisation of the petitioner. As per the provisions of the Andhra Pradesh State Public Distribution System Control Order, 2008, the third respondent is empowered to cancel the fair price shop authorisation of a dealer, by recording reasons. There is no statement of any of the witness was referred to therein so as to record adverse finding against the petitioner on the charges framed. Coming to the appellate and revisional authorities, it appears, the statements given by the cardholders before the Deputy Tahsildar were taken into consideration. It is not disputed that at the stage of enquiry by the Deputy Tahsildar, the petitioner was not put on notice before recording the statements of the cardholders. In that view of the matter, in the absence of specific reasons and as the statements were not made known to him in the show cause notice issued to the petitioner, I deem it appropriate that it is a fit case for re-consideration by the third respondent. It is stated that during pendency of the proceedings, temporary arrangements were made and in view of interim orders passed by this Court on 12.11.2008, in- charge dealer is distributing the essential commodities. For the aforesaid reasons, the impugned orders passed by the primary, appellate and revisional authorities are hereby quashed and there shall be a direction to the third respondent to consider the matter afresh by giving the petitioner an opportunity of hearing and also copies of the statements recorded during the enquiry by the Deputy Tahsildar, and pass appropriate orders, as expeditiously as possible, preferably, within a period of three (3) months from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. There shall be a further direction to the respondents to continue the existing arrangement till appropriate final orders are passed and communicated to the petitioner. Accordingly, the Writ Petition is allowed with the directions referred to above. No order as to costs. ______________________ R.SUBHASH REDDY, J 8th SEPTEMBER, 2011. kvni