IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction) WEDNESDAY, THE TWENTY THIRD DAY OF APRIL TWO THOUSAND AND EIGHT PRESENT THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE C.V.NAGARJUNA REDDY WRIT PETITION NO : 9042 of 2008 Between: Sri Malothu Ramchander S/o.M.Gamya Medchal Mandal, R.R. District. ..... PETITIONER AND 1 The Revenue Divisional Officer, East Division, R.R. District, at Malakunta Road, Goshamahal, Hyderabad. 2 The Tahsildar, Medchal Mandal, R.R. District. .....RESPONDENTS Counsel for the Petitioner: MR.BOLLAM LINGAIAH YADAV Counsel for the Respondents: GP FOR CIVIL SUPPLIES The Court made the following : ORDER: This Writ Petition is filed for a writ of Mandamus to set aside order dated 18-04-2008 passed by respondent No.2. The petitioner’s authorization has been suspended by respondent No.2 for the following reasons: ‘1. The petitioner has not displayed price list and stock board. 2. Sign board of the Ration shop is not available and 3. Number of card holders have complained against the Fair Price Shop Dealer.’ In my considered view, the above-mentioned reasons are wholly frivolous. The nature of the allegations, on which respondent No.2 exercised his power of suspension, undoubtedly shows that he abused his power and authority. None of the above- mentioned allegations pertains to any irregularities in the distribution of essential commodities by the petitioner. The allegation that number of cardholders have complained against the Fair Price Shop Dealer is too vague, as the nature of those complaints has not been disclosed by respondent No.2. This Court will not countenance such an abuse of authority on the part of respondent No.2. The impugned order is, therefore, set aside. For passing such an unjustifiable and arbitrary order, respondent No.2 shall pay costs of Rs.10,000/- (Rupees ten thousand only) to the Andhra Pradesh Legal Services Authority, Hyderabad, within a period of four weeks from today and report compliance to the Registry. The Secretary, Andhra Pradesh Legal Services Authority shall file a report before this Court as to the compliance of the aforesaid direction by respondent No.2. The District Collector, Ranga Reddy District, is directed to fix the responsibility on respondent No.2, after giving him an opportunity, and recover the costs from his pay. Writ Petition is, accordingly, allowed. _____________________ (C.V.Nagarjuna Reddy, J) 23rd April, 2008 lur