THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE GOPALA KRISHNA TAMADA Writ Petition No.19895 of 2009 Dated: 16.09.2009 Between: T. Reddy Sudha W/o T.Narayana Petitioner And The Joint Collector (CS) Chittor District at Chittor And another. Respondent THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE GOPALA KRISHNA TAMADA Writ Petition No.19895 OF 2009 ORDER: 1 The petitioner’s authorisation was cancelled by the second respondent after holding an enquiry and in that regard an order was passed on 31.08.2009. As against the said order cancelling her authorisation, the petitioner approached the appellate authority i.e. first respondent herein and filed an appeal on 10.09.2009. She also filed an application seeking suspension of the said order passed by the second respondent. But, however, as the first respondent has not passed any order, she approached this court and filed the present Writ Petition. 2 According to the learned counsel for the petitioner, Mr.Venkata Ramana Reddy, the main charge on which the petitioner’s authorisation was suspended is that the petitioner was carrying on business bename but in reality, according to the learned counsel for the petitioner, it is not benami but she is taking the assistance of the said individual who was present at the authorised fair price shop. According to him, the other charges are so trivial, which do not warrant the extreme step of cancellation of the authorisation standing in favour of the petitioner. 3 It may not be necessary for this court to go into all those aspects for the reason that the petitioner had already approached the appellate authority and preferred an appeal. 4 Hence, this Writ Petition is disposed of at the stage of admission directing the first respondent to dispose of the appeal said to have been preferred by the petitioner as expeditiously as possible, preferably, within a period of six weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. Further, as it is the contention of the learned counsel for the petitioner that the petitioner has distributed the commodities to the cardholders till the month of September, 2009 and she also paid the required amount for the month of October, 2009, the respondent authorities shall permit the petitioner to distribute the schedule commodities to the cardholders during the pendency of the said appeal. No order as to costs. _________ 16.09.2009 Note: