IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction) FRIDAY, THE TWENTIETH DAY OF MARCH TWO THOUSAND AND NINE PRESENT THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE C.V.RAMULU WRIT PETITION No.5884 of 2009 Between: D.Rajeswari, W/o. Dilli Babu, R/o. 2/66, Chavali Harijana Wada, C.L.N.Palle Village, Varadaiahpalem Mandal, Chittoor District. ..... PETITIONER AND 1 Government of Andhra Pradesh, Rep by its Commissioner, Civil Supplies, Hyderabad. 2 The joint Collector, Chittoor District, Chittoor 3 The Revenue Divisional Officer, (Appointing Authority under the A.P. Scheduled Commodities Regulation of Distribution by Card System) Order 1973) Tirupathi, Chittoor District. 4 Mandal Revenue Officer, Varadaiahpalem Mandal, Varadaiahpalem, Chittoor District. .....RESPONDENTS Petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying that in the circumstances stated in the Affidavit filed herein the High Court may be pleased to issue a Writ, Order or direction more particularly one in the nature of Writ of MANDAMUS declaring the action of the 3rd respondent herein in not completing the enquiry and passing final orders pursuant to the proceedings vide Roc.C/2484/2006 dated 9-11-2006, in spite of orders dated 28-1-2009 passed by the 2nd respondent, as being illegal, arbitrary and violative of Article 14 of the Constitution of India and consequently direct the respondents to permit the petitioner to run the Fair Price Shop at CLN Palle Village, Varadaiahaplem Mandal, Chittoor District. Counsel for the Petitioner: MR.T.C.D.SEKHAR Counsel for the Respondents: GP FOR CIVIL SUPPLIES GP FOR REVENUE The Court made the following: THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE C.V. RAMULU WRIT PETITION No.5884 OF 2009 ORDER: It appears, earlier, when the authorization of the petitioner as fair price shop dealer of C.L.N. Palle Village, Varadaiahpalem Mandal of Chittoor District, was suspended by the 3rd respondent- Revenue Divisional Officer, Tirupati, by order dated 09.11.2006, for certain irregularities alleged to have been committed by her, the petitioner approached this Court by way of filing W.P.No.24008 of 2006 and obtained interim suspension of the said order dated 09.11.2006. However, ultimately, the said writ petition was dismissed on 28.07.2008. Thereafter, the petitioner filed an appeal before the 2nd respondent- Joint Collector, Chittoor, questioning the suspension of her authorization, and the same was dismissed on 28.01.2009, but however, the 3rd respondent- Revenue Divisional Officer was directed to complete the enquiry within 15 days and pass final orders. Now, the grievance of the petitioner is that, in spite of the said direction, the 3rd respondent- Revenue Divisional Officer is not taking any steps to complete the enquiry and pass final orders. Learned counsel for the petitioner contends that the petitioner has not committed any irregularities much less the alleged irregularities and that, by virtue of the interim orders passed in the earlier writ petition, the petitioner was permitted to run the fair price shop during the pendency of the said writ petition and, taking the same into account, the petitioner may be permitted to run the shop till the enquiry is completed and final orders are passed by the 3rd respondent. In the facts and circumstances of the case, the 3rd respondent- Revenue Divisional Officer, Tirupati, is directed to complete the enquiry, as directed by the 2nd respondent, and pass appropriate orders as per law, expeditiously. Till such time, the petitioner shall be allowed to run the fair price shop in question. With the above directions, the writ petition is disposed of. No order as to costs. _________________ JUSTICE C.V. RAMULU 20th March, 2009. IBL