THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE GOPALA KRISHNA TAMADA WRIT PETITION No.17012 of 2009 DATE:25.08.2009 Between: Bhogi Kanayya Raju ... Petitioner and The Joint collector, Srikakulam District and another ... Respondents THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE GOPALA KRISHNA TAMADA WRIT PETITION No.17012 of 2009 ORDER: This writ petition is filed by the petitioner seeking a Writ of Mandamus to declare the action of 2nd respondent in keeping his authorisation under suspension from 05.01.2004 without conducting any enquiry, as illegal and contrary, and consequently, to direct the respondents to continue him as fair price shop dealer of Burja-III, Burja village and Mandal, Srikakulam District. 2. According to the petitioner, he is an authorised fair shop dealer of Burja-III Depot, Burja village and Mandal, Srikakulam District and his authorisatiion was kept under suspension by the Revenue Divisional Officer, Srikakulam District - 2nd respondent by proceedings in Rc.No.2443/2003/H dated 05.01.2004. Questioning the same, he approached this Court and filed W.P.No.24421 of 2004 and this Court allowed the said writ petition directing the respondents to restore his authorisation, by an order dated 28.12.2004. As against the said order, the respondents preferred W.A.No.1734 of 2005 before this Court and a Division Bench of this Court allowed the said writ appeal setting aside the order dated 28.12.2004 passed by a learned Single Judge of this Court in W.P.No.24421 of 2004, by an order dated 04.09.2008. In the said order, the 2nd respondent is specifically directed to complete the enquiry, as expeditiously as possible, in any event, not even later than three monthws from the date of receipt of a copy of the order, after complying with the proceedural requirements prescribed in this regard. As the enquiry is not yet completed, he filed the present writ petition. 3. On 18.08.2009 when this matter was taken up for hearing, the learned Government Pleader for Civil Supplies had sought for time to get instructions. Today, according to him, he did not receive any instructions. 4. Heard both sides. 5. The attitude of the 2nd respondent, in my considered view, is nothing but callous. When once irregularities are found, definitely it is for the authorities concerned to take stern action against the dealers and shall keep their authorisations under suspension, but the suspensions cannot be for eternity. Here is a case where the authorisation of the petitioner was kept under suspension as early as on 05.01.2004 and a Division Bench of this Court in W.A.No.1734 of 2005 specifically directed the 2nd respondent to complete the enquiry within a period of three months from the date of receipt of a copy of the order passed therein. Though the order in the said writ appeal was passed on 04.09.2008, the 2nd respondent has not completed the enquiry so far. In the light of the above, this Court is of the considered view that this writ petition can be allowed with a direction to the 2nd respondent to restore the authorisation of the petitioner forthwith. 6. Accordingly, this writ petition is allowed. The 2nd respondent is hereby directed to restore the authorisation of the petitioner in respect of fair price shop of Burja-III, Burja village and Mandal, Srikakulam District and allow him to supply the essential commodities to the cardholders, but however, the restoration of authorisation of the petitioner is subject to the result in the enquiry to be conducted by the 2nd respondent. No costs. _________________________ GOPALA KRISHNA TAMADA, J 25th August, 2009 CBS THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE GOPALA KRISHNA TAMADA WRIT PETITION No.17012 of 2009 (Allowed) 25th August, 2009 CBS