IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction) MONDAY, THE ELEVENTH DAY OF JULY TWO THOUSAND AND FIVE PRESENT THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE GODA RAGHURAM WRIT PETITION NO : 13558 of 2005 Between: K. Ramadevi, W/o Venkatadri, R/o Yakalacheruvu Village, Kadiri Mandal, Anantapur District. ..... PETITIONER AND 1 The Joint Collector, Anantapur. 2 The Revenue Divisional Officer, Punukonda, Ananthapur District. 3 The Mandal Revenue Officer, Kadiri , Ananthapur 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 will be pleased to issue a writ of mandamus or any other appropriate writ or direction declaring the action of the 1st respondent in rejecting application for stay pending disposal of the appeal as illegal and consequently stay the orders of the 2nd respondent passed in Rc.No. 2091/2004 dated 14-6-2005 pending disposal of the appeal before the 1st respondent and pass such other or further orders as the Hon'ble Court feels deem fit and proper in the facts and circumstances of the case. Counsel for the Petitioner: MR.O.MANOHER REDDY Counsel for the Respondents: GP FOR CIVIL SUPPLIES The Court, at the stage of admission, made the following : ORAL ORDER On allegations of irregularities in the functioning, the authorization of the petitioner to run a fair price shop in Yakalacheruvu village, Kadiri Mandal, Anantapur District was suspended by the Revenue Divisional Officer concerned by the order dated 14-06- 2005. The petitioner preferred an appeal to the 1st respondent against the order of the suspension. The 1st respondent by the order dated 23-06-2005 declined grant of stay and directed sending up of the connected records for expeditious disposal of the appeal. The petitioner submits that the charges for which his authorization was suspended are trivial and therefore suspension is not called for. These are not areas that require to be considered by this Court. There are some charges against the petitioner, which in the context of a fair price shop dealership could be considered grave enough to warrant a suspension pending enquiry. The petitioner is however entitled to an expeditious disposal of his appeal as also the substantive enquiry. In the circumstances the 1st respondent is directed to expeditiously dispose of the petitioner’s appeal directed against the order dated 14-06-2005 of the 2nd respondent suspending his authorization. The 2nd respondent is also directed to expeditiously conclude the enquiry into the charges framed against the petitioner. The 1st and 2nd respondents shall conclude the determination of the appeal and the substantive enquiry respectively, within a period of four (4) weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this Order and shall communicate the respective decisions to the petitioner within the aforesaid time. Accordingly, the writ petition is disposed of. No order as to costs. _________________ GODA RAGHURAM,J 11TH JULY 2005 *TSNR To 1 The Joint Collector, Anantapur. 2 The Revenue Divisional Officer, Punukonda, Ananthapur District. 3 The Mandal Revenue Officer, Kadiri , Ananthapur District. 4. Two CCS to G.P for Revenue, High Court Buildings, Hyderabad(OUT) 5. Two C.D.Copies.