IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction) FRIDAY, THE SIXTH DAY OF NOVEMBER TWO THOUSAND AND NINE PRESENT THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE GOPALA KRISHNA TAMADA WRIT PETITION NO : 23990 of 2009 Between: B. Lakshmi Narasamma. .. PETITIONER AND The Revenue Divisional Officer, Dharmavaram Revenue Division, Anantapur District and another. .....RESPONDENTS ORDER: The second respondent-Tahsildar, Kalyandurg Mandal, Anantapur District, inspected the fair price shop of the petitioner and found certain variations. On the basis of the said variations, he reported the matter to the first respondent-Revenue Divisional Officer, Anantapur District, who in turn, issued proceedings in RC No.1265/2009/F dated 15.10.2009, suspending the petitioner’s authorization and also issued a show cause notice directing her to file an explanation. As against the said order, the petitioner gave an explanation, dated 24.10.2009, by way of an appeal, before the first respondent, along with an application seeking suspension of the said order. But, however, no orders have been passed thereon. Hence, she approached this Court and filed the present writ petition. 2. The main contention of the learned counsel for the petitioner is that the first respondent ought not to have simultaneously issued the order of suspension as well as the show cause notice to the petitioner, but he should have issued the show cause notice before passing an order of suspension. 3. I am unable to accept the said contention. In a catena of decisions, this Court and the Supreme Court has taken the view that the suspension pending enquiry cannot be treated as a punishment and further, issuance of a show cause notice and holding of an enquiry etc., are required when the authority is passing a final order in accordance with law. It is only an order of suspension pending enquiry and it shall not precede by any show cause notice. Since the petitioner approached the first respondent and filed an appeal, the first respondent is hereby directed to dispose of the same, as expeditiously as possible, within six weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. In the event of his failure to dispose of the said appeal, the petitioner’s authorization shall be restored and she shall be permitted to distribute the scheduled commodities to the cardholders during the pendency of the appeal. 4. Accordingly, the Writ Petition is disposed of. No costs. __________________________ GOPALA KRISHNA TAMADA, J Date:06.11.2009 Note: Issue CC by Monday. (Bo) sj