IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction) MONDAY, THE EIGTH DAY OF NOVEMBER TWO THOUSAND AND FOUR PRESENT THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE B.PRAKASH RAO WRIT PETITION NO : 11881 of 2004 Between: Sri Mohd. Anwar Khan, S/o.Late Abdul Samad Khan, (PHC) Shortman, Occ:Dealer of F.P.shop No.425 King Koti, Hyderabad. ..... PETITIONER AND 1 The Commissioner, Civil Supplies, Government of A.P., at Somajiguda, Hyderabad-4. 2 The Chief Rationing officer, Twin Cities, S.P.Road, Opp: Anand Talkies, Secunderabad-3. 3 The District Supply officer (City) Hyderabad O/o.C.R.O.' Building Opp:Anand Talkies, S.P.Road, Secunderabad-3. .....RESPONDENTS Petition under Article 226 of the constitution of India praying that in the circumstances stated in the Affidavit filed herein the High Court will be pleased to issue an appropriate writ, order or direction particularly one in the nature of writ of Mandamus, declaring the action of the respondents No.1 in proc.No.CCS.Ref.No.N1/3563/2004 dt.15-6-2004 and order of the Respondent No.2 C1/3238.2003 and order of the Respondent No.3 B1/1733/2003 are illegal, improper and null and void, violative of principles of natural justice. Counsel for the Petitioner: MR.BOLLAM LINGAIAH YADAV Counsel for the Respondents: GP FOR CIVIL SUPPLIES The Court made the following : ORDER: Heard both sides. 2. The petitioner herein claiming to be a handicapped person, being a very short in his stature, and who was holding Fair Price Shop dealership, filed this Writ Petition, inter alia, seeking to assail the orders of cancellation, by way of this Writ Petition, as illegal, bad, and void. 3. The case of the petitioner in brief is that he has been Fair Price Shop dealer since the year 1988 and has been doing the business without any remarks or any complaints. However, during the inspection conducted by the Assistant Supply Officer, Circle IV on 11-06-2003, certain irregularities have been found, which include the non-lifting of the sufficient quota during the month of May 2003 and thereby causing substantial inconvenience to the cardholders and further that there was tampering in regard to the bank slip in the month of January 2003 by converting the figures of Rs.619/- into that of Rs.7,619/-, which amounts to forgery. On these allegations the petitioner was given a show cause notice on 17-09-2003 and after holding an enquiry, ultimately the petitioner’s dealership was cancelled forfeiting the entire security deposit in favour of the Government. As against the same, the petitioner has filed an appeal before C.R.O., but the same was dismissed as per Proceedings No.C1/3238/2003. Later, the petitioner filed a revision on the file of the 1st respondent herein. T h e 1st respondent also in proceedings No.CCS Ref.No.N1/3563/2004 dated 15-06-2004, confirmed the orders of the lower authorities. Hence, the Writ Petition. 4. The learned Counsel for the petitioner submits that having regard to the fact that the petitioner is physically handicapped and the charge No.1 being very trivial, there could not have been such a serious punishment of cancellation of dealership and further even in regard to the 2nd charge as to tampering, it is only due to the illness of the mother, the petitioner assigned the bank work to his clerk and the said action was done by his clerk. Therefore, he cannot be attributed with any such allegation. 5. The learned Assistant Government Pleader appearing on behalf of the respondents herein sought to repel the said contention on the ground that all these aspects have been duly considered and the petitioner’s explanation was not found satisfactory and hence the impugned action is perfectly valid. 6. Considering the submissions made and on perusal of the material, the question, which falls for consideration, is as to whether on the facts and circumstances and especially in regard to the allegations as made against the petitioner in the charges framed, the impugned action of the respondents in canceling the dealership of the petitioner is valid. 7. There is no dispute to the facts that the petitioner is a physically handicapped, virtually having no normal hands and legs, and he has been holding the dealership since the year 1988. There is also no dispute to the fact that there is such inspection by the authorities on 11-06-2003 and issuance of show cause notice in regard to the allegations found. The petitioner also does not dispute about non-lifting of the sufficient quota in May 2003 and submits that it is only due to the illness of the mother the petitioner could not possibly attend to the same and thereby he should be exonerated of the charges. In regard to the other charge of tampering, the petitioner tries to put blame on his clerk and totally pleads ignorance thereon. However, it is seen that having regard to the dealership and the conditions attached thereto the petitioner cannot seek any exoneration, nor realization of the essential commodities to supply to the cardholders. Having regard to the fact that the petitioner did not lift the stock, apparently cardholders deprived of the essential commodities and further in regard to the charge of tampering it is admitted case that the figures have been changed from Rs.619/- to Rs.7,619/-. There is absolutely no valid explanation forthcoming as to such dispute. Further, on the face of it there is admittedly exact amounts, as shown, have not been deposited without any valid reason. 8. In the circumstances, I do not find any justification in the claim of the petitioner nor he can seek any indulgence from this Court in view of such findings arrived at. Hence, there are no merits in the Writ Petition. 9. The Writ Petition is, accordingly, dismissed. No costs. ________________ B.PRAKASH RAO, J. Dated 08-11-2004. SKMR To 1 The Commissioner, Civil Supplies, Government of A.P., at Somajiguda, Hyderabad-4. 2 The Chief Rationing officer, Twin Cities, S.P.Road, Opp: Anand Talkies, Secunderabad-3. 3 The District Supply officer (City) Hyderabad O/o.C.R.O.' Building Opp:Anand Talkies, S.P.Road, Secunderabad-3. 4. 2CCs to G.P. for Civil Supplies, High Court Buildings, Hyderabad (OUT). 5. 2CD copies