IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction) THURSDAY, THE EIGHTEENTH DAY OF JUNE TWO THOUSAND AND NINE PRESENT THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE C.V.NAGARJUNA REDDY WRIT PETITION NO : 11843 of 2009 Between: Borusu Satya Krishna S/o.Rama satyanarayana Resident of H.No.21-66,Borusuvari Savaram Kothapet,East Godavari District ..... PETITIONER AND 1 The District Collector,East Godavari District at Kakinada 2 The Joint Collector, East Godavari District, at Kakinada 3 The Revenue Divisional Officer, Amalapuram East Godavari District 4 The Tahsildar (Mandal Revenue officer),Kothapet Mandal East Godavari District ..RESPONDENTS Counsel for the Petitioner:MR.K.RAVI Counsel for the Respondents: AGP FOR CIVIL SUPPLIES The Court made the following : O R D E R: This writ petition is filed for a writ of Mandamus to declare the inaction of respondent No.3 in supplying essential commodities to the petitioner’s fair price shop No.9 of Kothapet, East Godavari District as illegal. In his affidavit, the petitioner, the fair price shop dealer, averred that on account of his ill-health, he applied for leave and accordingly, leave was sanctioned and that an in-charge arrangement was made to distribute essential commodities attached to his shop by entrusting the same to a third party. On 23-09-2006, respondent No.3 issued show cause notice calling upon the petitioner to show cause why the authorization granted to him should not be cancelled as he continued to fail to lift the essential commodities from December, 2005. In this writ petition, the petitioner has taken the stand that an explanation was submitted to respondent No.3 in reply to the said show cause notice on 05-10-2006, wherein he explained that as leave was sanctioned to him due to his illness, an in-charge arrangement was made and that he is not aware whether the in-charge dealer has not lifted the essential commodities by producing necessary D.Ds. The grievance of the petitioner is that though the said explanation was given by him as far back as October, 2006, no order has been passed so far and the essential commodities have not been supplied to him. Inasmuch as the relief claimed by the petitioner in this writ petition is innocuous, the writ petition is disposed of with the direction to respondent No.3 to pass an appropriate order on the show cause notice dated 23-09-2006 issued to the petitioner, after considering the latter’s explanation, if any filed by him, within a period of four (4) weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. The supply of essential commodities should be resumed to the petitioner, if further action proposed in the show cause notice is dropped. As a sequel to disposal of main petition WPMP No.15251 of 2009 filed by the petitioner for interim relief is disposed of as infructuous. C.V.NAGARJUNA REDDY, J Dated 18th June, 2009 vrn