IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction) THURSDAY, THE SIXTEENTH DAY OF OCTOBER TWO THOUSAND AND EIGHT PRESENT THE HON'BLE MS JUSTICE G.ROHINI WRIT PETITION NO.22550 of 2008 Between: D.Gopal Reddy, S/o. Damma Reddy, Shop.No.0156, Ram Nagar, Karim Nagar. ...PETITIONER AND 1 The Revenue Divisional Officer, Karimnagar. 2 The Tahsildar, Karimnagar. ...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 order or direction more in the nature of Writ of Mandamus, to declare the action of the 1st Respondent in issuing impugned show- cause notice No.K/3893/08, dated 24-09-2008 and also proceedings No.K/3893/2008, dated 24-09-2008 of the 1st Respondent as illegal, arbitrary, discriminatory, violative of Articles, 14, 16 and 21 of the Constitution of India and set aside the same, consequently direct the Respondents, to drop all further proceedings against the Petitioner in pursuance to, and in connection with the impugned proceedings No.K/3893/2008, dated 24-09-2008 of the 1st Respondent, with a further direction to restore and continue the authorization of the Petitioner in respect of fair price shop No.0156, Karim Nagar. Counsel for the Petitioner: MR.POODATTU AMARENDER Counsel for the Respondents: GP FOR CIVIL SUPPLIES The Court made the following: THE HON'BLE MS JUSTICE G.ROHINI WRIT PETITION NO.22550 of 2008 ORDER: The petitioner herein is the authorized dealer of Fair Price Shop No.0156 situated at Ramnagar, Karimnagar District. This Writ Petition is ﬁled challenging the order dated 24.09.2008 passed by the Revenue Divisional Oﬃcer, Karimnagar, thereby suspending the authorization of the petitioner, pending enquiry. Though various grounds have been raised by the petitioner assailing the impugned order, I am not inclined to express any opinion on merits since the correctness of the allegations made by the petitioner is the subject matter of the enquiry to be conducted by the Revenue Divisional Officer. As a matter of fact, a show cause notice was issued on 24.09.2008 and the petitioner states that he submitted his explanation. In the circumstances, though the impugned order of suspension pending enquiry does not warrant any interference, I deem it appropriate to dispose of the Writ Petition with a direction to the ﬁrst respondent to complete the enquiry following due process of law, as expeditiously as possible, preferably, within a period of four {4} weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. ____________ (G.ROHINI, J) 16th October 2008 Note: CC in three days B/O RRB