The Hon'ble Sri Justice C.V.Nagarjuna Reddy Writ Petition No.21375 of 2008 Date: 12.07.2011 Between: M/s.Mummana Petroleum Service, Peddagantyada, Visakhapatnam, Rep. by its Partner Marichetla Ramakrishna ..... Petitioner AND 1.HPCL Hindustan Petroleum Corporation Limited and another .....Respondents Counsel for the Petitioner: Sri Govardhan Venu Counsel for the Respondents: None appeared The Court made the following: Order: At the interlocutory stage, the Writ Petition is taken up for hearing and disposal with the consent of the learned Counsel for the petitioner. This Writ Petition is filed for a Mandamus to set aside proceedings No.VRO/VIS/0063/September/2008, dated 22- 09-2008, whereby the respondents have advised the petitioner- outlet to suspend the sales. No counter-affidavit is filed on behalf of the respondents. A perusal of the record shows that following an inspection of the petitioner- retail outlet on 22-09-2008, the Officials of respondent No.2, have issued the impugned proceedings. The petitioner pleaded that it has eight vending units in its retail outlet for MS, HSD and Turbo. It is its further case that while it was conducting sales in accordance with the marketing guidelines of respondent No.1- Corporation, in Annexure-1 to the inspection report, dated 22-09-2008, it was alleged that in respect of unit No.1, dealing with MS, seals were not found on meter unit of “A” and in respect of unit Nos.3 and 5, there was shortage in delivery. The petitioner has questioned the action of the respondents in suspending the sales in respect of all the eight units instead of confining such suspension to unit Nos.1, 3 and 5 alone. No counter-affidavit is filed by the respondents. The material available on record does not disclose as to whether the respondents have finalized the proceedings initiated against the petitioner. If the proceedings have not, so far, been finalized, I do not find any reason for the respondents not to have done that because the interim order passed by this Court on 26-09-2008 does not prevent them from proceeding further and finalizing the same. Be that as it may, if the respondents have not already concluded the proceedings, they are directed to finalise the proceedings and pass a final order, after giving an opportunity of personal hearing to the petitioner’s representative, within a period of two months from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. As no specific allegations were made in respect of vending units other than unit Nos.1, 3 and 5, there is no reason why the petitioner shall be prevented from vending the products through the remaining units till finalization of the proceedings. The petitioner shall be permitted to continue the sales in respect of the vending units other than unit nos.1, 3 and 5, as directed by this Court vide interim order, dated 26-09-2008, till conclusion of the proceedings and passing final order therein by the respondents. Subject to the above directions, the Writ Petition is disposed of. As a sequel to disposal of the Writ Petition, WPMP.Nos.27924 of 2008 and 963 of 2009 are disposed of. ______________________ (C.V.Nagarjuna Reddy, J) 12th July, 2011 LUR