HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE NOUSHAD ALI Writ Petition No.27340 of 2011 Date: 29-9-2011 Between G.Godavari … Petitioner and The Government of Andhra Pradesh, Rep. by its Principal Secretary, Civil Supplies and Consumer Affairs Department, Secretariat, Hyderabad and 3 others … Respondents HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE NOUSHAD ALI Writ Petition No.27340 of 2011 Order: Heard Sri V.Ravi Kiran Rao, learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned Government Pleader for Civil Supplies appearing for the respondents 1 to 4, and with their consent, this writ petition is disposed of, at the stage of admission. 2. The petitioner is a fair price shop dealer of shop No.87, Nizamabad (Urban). Basing on the report of the Deputy Tahsildar (Enforcement), Nizamabad, dated 26-4-2011, alleging that the petitioner committed irregularities in the distribution of essential commodities contravening the conditions of the Andhra Pradesh State Public Distribution System (Control) Order, 2008 (for short ‘Control Order’), proceedings were initiated for confiscation of the seized stock during the inspection of the shop under Section 6A of the Essential Commodities Act, 1955 (for short ‘the Act’). In view of the same, the Revenue Divisional Officer, Nizamabad, the 3rd respondent herein, suspended the authorization vide proceedings No.B3/3449/2011, dated 06-5-2011. Proceedings initiated under Section 6A of the Act were culminated in an order passed by the Collector (Civil Supplies), Nizamabad, the 2nd respondent herein, in Case No.CS6/354/2011, dated 13-8-2011, ordering confiscation of the entire stock. The petitioner states that she has already preferred an appeal against the said order. 3. The grievance of the petitioner is that the 3rd respondent suspended the authorization only because confiscation proceedings were pending against the petitioner. Since the said proceedings have ended, the petitioner is entitled for restoration of the authorization. The petitioner further states that except passing an interim order suspending the authorization, no disciplinary proceedings were initiated under the provisions of the Control Order. Therefore, the petitioner is entitled to be restored with the authorization. 4. It is stated that the petitioner has submitted a representation dated 22-8-2011 to the Revenue Divisional Officer, Nizamabad and the said authority has not considered the same so far. It is, therefore, submitted that a direction be issued to the 3rd respondent to dispose of the said representation by passing appropriate orders having regard to the aforesaid facts in order to avoid further hardship to the petitioner. 5. I am not inclined to express any opinion on the merits of the case. 6. It is true that the authorization was suspended on 06-5-2011 since a case under Section 6A of the Act was pending against her and the said case ended by virtue of the orders of the Joint Collector, Nizamabad, dated 13-8-2011. There is no dispute that the petitioner has already submitted a representation to the 3rd respondent on 22-8-2011. Therefore, the Revenue Divisional Officer, the 3rd respondent herein, ought to have considered the said representation and taken an appropriate decision expeditiously. 7. In the circumstances as above, this writ petition is disposed of, directing the 3rd respondent-Revenue Divisional Officer, Nizamabad, to consider and dispose of the representation of the petitioner dated 22-8-2011 by passing appropriate orders as expeditiously as possible, preferably within a period of 4 (four) weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. No costs. ___________________ NOUSHAD ALI, J. 29th September, 2011. Note:- Issue C.C. in one week. (B/o) Ak HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE NOUSHAD ALI Writ Petition No.27340 of 2011 29th September, 2011. (Ak)