IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction) TUESDAY, THE SEVENTH DAY OF APRIL TWO THOUSAND AND NINE PRESENT THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE C.V.RAMULU WRIT PETITION No. 12449 of 2008 Between: Lavudya Chander S/o.Ramji R/o.anjanapuram village, Singabhoopalam Post Kothagudem Taluk, Khammam District ..... PETITIONER AND 1 The Revenue Divisional Officer,Kothagudem Khammam District 2 The Joint Collector, Khammam,Khammam District 3 Sarpanch, Singabhoopalem Gram panchayat Kothagudem Taluk, Khammam District 4 Govt. of A.P., rep. by its Principal Secretary, Food, Civil Supplies and Consumer Affairs (CS-I) Department, Secretariat, Hyderabad. (Respondent No.4 is impleaded as per Court order dated 02.07.2008 in WPMP.No.17988 of 2008) .....RESPONDENTS Petition under Article 226 of the constitution of India praying that in the circumstances stated in the Affidavit filed herein the High Court may be pleased to issue a writ order or direction more in the nature of mandamus declaring the action of the Revenue Divisional Officer, Kothagudem who is the 1st respondent herein in passing the impugned orders in his proceedings in Rc.No.J/929/2008 dated 20.5.2008 whereby the authorisation granted in favour of the petitioner is suspended pending inquiry and issued a show cause notice of even date and such action of the R.D.O. is without jurisdiction or authority or power and opposed to the power conferred up on the disciplinary authority under clause 5 read with clause 2(21) of the A.P State public Distribution system control Order ,2001 and consequentially to direct the respondents to refrain from taking any action in pursuant to the impugned orders. Counsel for the Petitioner: SRI P.V.MAHESH Counsel for the Respondents 1 and 2: GP FOR REVENUE Counsel for Respondent No.3: SRI G.ELISHA, STANDING COUNSEL The Court made the following : THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE C.V.RAMULU WRIT PETITION No.12449 of 2008 ORDER: Learned counsel for the petitioner, on instructions, submits that he does not want to press the writ petition. Recording the submission of the learned counsel, the writ petition is dismissed as not pressed. _________________ JUSTICE C.V. RAMULU 7th April, 2009. IBL