IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction) TUESDAY, THE TWENTY NINETH DAY OF APRIL TWO THOUSAND AND EIGHT PRESENT THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE C.V.NAGARJUNA REDDY WRIT PETITION NO : 8834 of 2008 Between: Gajjala Nageswara Rao S/o.Sarveswara Rao R/o.Mudicherla(V) Lingampalem(M) W.G Dist ..... PETITIONER AND 1 The State of A.P Rep.by its Principal Secretary to Civil Supplies Department Secretariat,Saifabad,Hyd 2 The Tahsildar Lingapalem(M) W.G Dist .....RESPONDENTS Counsel for the Petitioner: MR.M.SUDHEER for MR.NIMMAGADDA SATYANARAYANA Counsel for the Respondents: GP FOR CIVIL SUPPLIES The Court made the following : Order: This Writ Petition is filed for a writ of Mandamus to declare the action of respondent No.2, in not releasing essential commodities in spite of payment made by the petitioner in respect of fair price shop No.17 of Mudicherla Village, Lingapalem Mandal, West Godavari District, as illegal and arbitrary. By proceedings dated 16-06-2005, the Revenue Divisional Officer, Eluru, cancelled the petitioner’s authorization. Questioning the said order, the petitioner filed appeal before the Joint Collector, West Godavari District. The said appeal was allowed by him on 24- 03-2008. On 29-03-2008, the Revenue Divisional Officer, Eluru, passed order restoring the petitioner’s authorization. The petitioner claims that on 02-04-2008, he paid the required amount, by way of Demand Draft, for release of essential commodities for distribution for the month of April, 2008. The grievance of the petitioner is that despite the payment for the release of stock, respondent No.2 has not allotted the essential commodities to him. At the hearing, the learned Assistant Government Pleader for Civil Supplies placed before me a copy of the fax message sent by respondent No.2 wherein it is mentioned that order dated 24-03-2008 of the Joint Collector, Eluru, and order dated 29-03-2008 of the Revenue Divisional Officer, Eluru, were received by him on 30-03-2008; that the incharge dealer remitted the cost of rice on 29-03-2008, and hence, the essential commodities for the month of April 2008 were delivered to him. He also stated that the appeal period of 30 days has not been completed for the petitioner to file the present Writ Petition and that the villagers of Mudicherla Village have submitted a petition to him and the Revenue Divisional Officer, Eluru, opposing allotment of the essential commodities to the petitioner. In my view, the contents of the fax message are vague and evasive. While respondent No.2 referred to the date, on which the incharge dealer remitted the cost of rice, he is silent, evidently deliberately, to mention the date on which the incharge dealer was permitted to lift the commodities for the month of April, 2008. If by 30-03-2008, on which date, even according to respondent No.2, he received the orders of the Joint Collector and the Revenue Divisional Officer restoring the petitioner’s authorization, the essential commodities were not lifted by the incharge dealer, there was no warrant for respondent No.2 to permit the incharge dealer to lift the essential commodities after 30-03-2008. If he had allowed the incharge dealer to lift the commodities after the said date, he would have committed a grave misconduct in defying the orders of his superior officers viz., the Joint Collector and the Revenue Divisional Officer, for which he is liable for action by way of disciplinary proceedings. Respondent No.2, being only an implementing authority, it is not his concern whether some of the villagers objected to allotment of Essential commodities to the petitioner, since he is bound by the orders of his superior Officers. He is equally unconcerned whether the appeal time, for anyone to question order dated 24-03-2008 passed by the Joint Collector allowing the petitioner’s appeal, expired or not before the petitioner filed the present Writ Petition. From the contents of the fax message, it is reasonable to presume that respondent No.2 guided himself by extraneous considerations in denying essential commodities to the petitioner for the month of April, 2008. In these circumstances, the Writ Petition is disposed of directing the Joint Collector, West Godavari District, Eluru, to hold an enquiry against respondent No.2. If he finds that respondent No.2 permitted the incharge dealer to lift the essential commodities on or after 30-03-2008, he shall consider initiating disciplinary proceedings against respondent No.2, for acting contrary to the orders passed by him and the Revenue Divisional Officer by which the petitioner’s authorization is restored. It is needless to observe that from the month of May, 2008, respondent No.2 shall resume supply of essential commodities to the petitioner subject, however, to any orders that may be passed in the appeal, if any, filed by any aggrieved party against order dated 24-03-2008 of the Joint Collector, West Godavari District. As a sequel to disposal of the Writ Petition, WPMP.No.11706 of 2008 filed by the petitioner for interim relief is disposed of as infructuous. ____________________ (C.V.NAGARJUNA REDDY, J) 29th April, 2008 LUR