•^s.^^w'^^ HIGH COURT QF JUDICATUtE GHHATTISGWtH :BUJ^PyFt ^. SINGl£BENCH : HON'BLE SHRI S.R.NAY^W, CJ. WRIT PETITION iC) N0.8667 OF 2808 PETITIONER Vs. RESPONDENTS 1. 2. 3. Sahakari Vipnan Sairtia Marayadit, through Us : Blsesar Ram, S/o. Boharan Ram, Aged about ^ years, teslstont Manager, Sahakari Wpnan Sanstha Marayadit, Podi, Uproda, Ka^hwa, District Korba (CG). State of Chhattisgarii Threi^h the Secretaiy, Deparhnent of Food & Cwlt Supplies, D.K.S. Building, Mantralaya, Raipur, ChhatBsgarh. Collector, Korba (CG). District Food Officer, Korba (CG). Present: Shri V.R. Tiwari, leamed counsel forttie petitioner. Shri Utfcarsh Verma, l^imed Dy. G.A. for the respondents. ORAL ORDER (Passed on 9m Novsmber, 20)6) The authorization issued in tevourof the petitioner-sochrty to run fair price shops, it is alleged, has been suspended pendlng enquiiy on certain alleged grounds. In this wrtt peUUon, the pelMoner has sougW for a direcBon to revoke the order of suspension and to altow the peflUoner- society to continue its operadon of fair prtce shops In Bairavthal & Madwa Doda. (2) tn the flret place, tt needs to be noBcad ttiat th®R^isby ought not to have registered this writ peUtton because tfte pstiUoner has not produced the suspension order nor he has sought for dispensatton of production of the impugned order. Be VhaSt as it may, the power <rf ttie Collector, Korba, the second respondent herein, to suspend ttie r ./ -<a- authorizatlon pending enquiry on the all^ed altogaUons cannot be doubted. The argument of the teamed counssl for the petlUoner-society is that the second respondent before passing the suspenstwi ordar did not consider the statement of ob|ecBons fllad by the petjfloner in respoose to the show-cause noUce issued to it. This contention canrKrtbe appreciated at all in ttie absence of Impugned order. Be that as tt may, the second respondent is not expected to give reasons in support of ths suspension order. The objecttons said to have been filed by the pdlUonera are required to be consldered by the second respondent when he proceeds to pass appropriate final order after conducUng the enquiry and that stage is not yet reached. Looking from any angle, there is no merit In this writ pefition and it is accordingly dismissed. No costs. Sd/- Chief Justice 1