HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE R. SUBHASH REDDY WRIT PETITION No.27377 of 2006 Date : 13.10.2011 Between : Ch. Tatayyalu. …..Petitioner And The Appointing Authority-cum-Revenue Divisional Officer, Narsipatnam & others. …..Respondents HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE R. SUBHASH REDDY WRIT PETITION No.27377 of 2006 ORDER : The petitioner is authorized fair price shop dealer for distribution of essential commodities in Kothapatnam village of Rambilli Mandal in Visakhapatnam District. A case was registered against the petitioner in Crime No.73 of 2006 for the alleged offences under Sections 147, 307, 324 r/w. 34 of IPC. On the ground that he was arrested and sent for judicial remand, the 2nd respondent-Mandal Revenue Officer has passed orders, dated 25.11.2006, in Proceedings Rc.No.205/2006A, making alternate arrangements by placing the 3rd respondent, the fair price shop dealer of Velpugondupalem village, as dealer for the petitioner’s fair price shop. At the stage of admission, this Court granted interim order on 02.01.2007, and it is stated that in view of the said interim order, the petitioner is continued as dealer and is distributing the essential commodities. Though the writ petition is of 2006, no counter affidavit is filed and it is submitted by the learned counsel for petitioner as well as the learned Government Pleader appearing for respondents that in the criminal proceedings, the petitioner was convicted and a fine of Rs.3,000/- was imposed on him. It is also stated that the criminal revision petition filed against the order of conviction, is pending before this Court. As per the scheme of the A.P. Public Distribution System (Control) Order, 2001, the authorities can either suspend or cancel the authorization, if any allegations are levelled against the dealer, but when the authorization of the petitioner is in force, without suspension of such authorization, no additional arrangement can be made. As it is stated that the criminal case registered against the petitioner was already disposed of and only fine is imposed and no further proceedings are initiated against the petitioner, I deem it appropriate to allow the writ petition by setting aside the order, dated 25.11.2006, passed by the 2nd respondent-Mandal Revenue Officer in Proceedings Rc.No.205/2006A. Accordingly, the writ petition is allowed and the impugned order, dated 25.11.2006, is set aside. No order as to costs. ______________________ R. SUBHASH REDDY, J 13th October 2011 ajr