HON’BLE MR.JUSTICE R.SUBHASH REDDY Writ Petition No.20588 of 2008 Date: September 7, 2011 Between: Smt.Kolli Venkata Satyavathi, W/o.Raju Naidu, aged 33 years, Occ:F.P.Shop Dealer, Shop No.34, Theeda village, Kasimkota Mandal, Visakhapatnam District … Petitioner And The Revenue Divisional Officer, Visakhapatnam, Visakhapatnam District and others … Respondents Order: This writ petition is filed with the prayer which reads as under: “It is hereby prayed that this Hon’ble Court may be pleased to issue a Writ of Mandamus or any other appropriate writ, order or direction, declaring the action of the respondents in not permitting the petitioner to distribute the essential commodities to the card holders of F.P.Shop No.34, Theeda village, Kasimkota Mandal, Visakhapatnam District even though her authorization is subsisting as illegal, arbitrary, unjust and against to the principles of natural justice and contrary to the provisions of A.P.Public Distribution System Order, 2001 and consequently direct the respondents to supply essential commodities to the petitioner so as to enable him to distribute the same to the card holders.” Petitioner is a permanent dealer with regard to fair price shop No.2 of Theeda village of Kasimkota Mandal, Visakhapatnam District. When supply of essential commodities has been stopped to her shop, on the ground that she is not residing in the village and has entrusted the work to her relative, she filed the present writ petition in the year 2008. No interim order has been passed by this Court for restoring supply of essential commodities to the shop of the petitioner. The 2nd respondent-Tahsildar, Kasimkota Mandal, has filed counter-affidavit on behalf of the respondents denying the allegations of the petitioner. In the counter- affidavit, it is stated that the petitioner is not residing in the village and entrusted the work to her relative, which is causing inordinate delay in distribution of essential commodities. However, in the counter-affidavit, there is no indication of passing any order suspending the authorisation of the petitioner with regard to the shop in question. Although it is stated that some in-charge arrangements are made for distribution of essential commodities with regard to the shop in question, it is not known how such arrangements could be made without there being any order suspending or canceling the authorisation of the petitioner. Be that as it may, as much as it is stated that enquiry is pending before the Revenue Divisional Officer on the allegations leveled against the petitioner, I deem it appropriate to dispose of the writ petition directing the 1st respondent-Revenue Divisional Officer to complete the enquiry and pass appropriate orders within three months from today. If the enquiry is not concluded and no orders are passed within the stipulated time, supply of essential commodities shall be restored to the shop of the petitioner based on her authorisation. Writ petition is disposed of with the above directions. No order as to costs. ___________________ (R.SUBHASH REDDY, J) September 7, 2011 MRR