IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction) TUESDAY, THE THIRD DAY OF MARCH TWO THOUSAND AND NINE PRESENT THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE C.V.RAMULU WRIT PETITION No. 4229 of 2009 Between: P.Peeraiah S/o. Papaiah R/o. Ravigudem, Dornakal Mandal, Warangal District. ..... PETITIONER AND 1 The Collector (CS), Waranagal, Warangal District. 2 The Revenue Divisional Officer, Mahabubabad, Warangal District. 3 The Tahsildar, Dornakal Mandal, Warangal District. .....RESPONDENT(S) 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 an appropriate writ, order or direction, more particularly, one in the nature of Writ of Mandamus, declaring the order of the 2nd respondent in Rc.No. C/577/2007, dated 16-11-2008 whereby suspending the dealership of petitioner Fair price shop at Ravigudem Village, Dornakal Mandal, Warangal District as arbitrary, illegal, unjust, contrary to law, principles of natural justice, apart from being violative of the fundamental rights guaranteed under Article 14 of the Constitution of India and issue a consequential direction to the respondents to continue the petitioner as Fair Price Shop Dealer of Ravigudem Village, Dornakal Mandal, Warangal District. Counsel for the Petitioner:MR.A.RAVINDER Counsel for the Respondents: GP FOR CIVIL SUPPLIES The Court made the following : THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE C.V.RAMULU WRIT PETITION No.4229 of 2009 ORDER: This writ petition is filed seeking a Mandamus declaring the order dated 16.11.2008 passed by the 2nd respondent-Revenue Divisional Officer, Mahabubabad, as arbitrary and illegal. Under the impugned order, dated 16.11.2008, the authorization of the petitioner as fair price shop dealer of Ravigudem village of Dornakal Mandal was temporarily suspended for certain irregularities alleged to have been committed by the petitioner. The petitioner contends that before passing of the impugned order, the 2nd respondent has neither conducted an enquiry nor afforded him an opportunity to substantiate the alleged charges framed against him. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned Government Pleader for Civil Supplies. It is to be noted that as against the impugned order dated 16.11.2008, the petitioner has already preferred an appeal before the 1st respondent-Collector (CS), Warangal on 08.12.2008, and the same is pending. In view of the same, without expressing any opinion on merits, the 1st responden-Collector (CS), Warangal is directed to dispose of the appeal purported to have been filed by the petitioner on 08.12.2008 being aggrieved by the order dated 16.11.2008, in accordance with law, within a period of four weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. With the above directions, the writ petition is disposed of. _____________ C.V.RAMULU,J 03.03.2009 v v