HON’BLE MR.JUSTICE R. SUBHASH REDDY Writ Petition No.20958 of 2008 Date: October 27, 2011 Between: Korada Ramakrishna, S/o.Appala Swamy … Petitioner And A.P.State Civil Supplies Corporation Ltd., District Office, at Kakinada, E.G.District rep. by its Ex-Officio Executive Director & Joint Collector … Respondent Order: This writ petition is filed questioning the order dated 05.08.2008 passed in proceedings No.PDS2/Movt./FG5 (845) Stage-II/2007-08, whereby the Joint Collector & Ex. Officio Executive Director, APSCSC Ltd., ordered termination of the contract of the petitioner and further ordered forfeiture of security deposit of Rs.1,50,000/- and bank guarantee of Rs.2,50,000/- furnished by him. Petitioner, a resident of Gandhipuram in Rajahmundry, was appointed as Stage-II contractor for transportation of essential commodities from MLS Point Rajahmundry to F.P. Shops located in Rajanagaram and Rajahmundry (Rural) Mandal. On an allegation that on 24.07.2008, he has diverted 37.24 qtls. of PDS Rice pertaining to F.P. Shop No.22 of Mukkinada of Rajanagaram Mandal, proceedings were initiated to cancel/terminate the agreement of the petitioner. Petitioner was issued show-cause notice vide proceedings dated 26.07.2008 to show cause why his contract should not be terminated apart from forfeiture of security deposit of Rs.1,50,000/- and also bank guarantee of Rs.2,50,000/- furnished by him while entering into contract. This writ petition is filed mainly on the ground that the impugned order is passed without giving opportunity to the petitioner. It is the case of the petitioner that show-cause notice dated 26.07.2008 was served on him on 28.07.2008 and he was in hospital during the relevant time and his family members received the notice on 28.07.2008 and immediately after he was discharged from hospital, he filed his explanation on 06.08.2008. It is stated that even before filing of explanation, which is filed within one week from the date of receipt of the show-cause notice, the impugned order is passed. Though the validity of the impugned order is questioned on merits also, but this court of the view that, as no reasonable time is granted to the petitioner for filing explanation, there is no necessity to go into the merits of the matter on the allegations made against the petitioner and findings recorded thereon. It is to be noticed that show-cause notice is dated 26.07.2008, which was served on the family of the petitioner on 28.07.2008 to which petitioner has filed his explanation on 06.08.2008, but the impugned order is passed on 05.08.2008; there was not even one week time granted to the petitioner after serving the show-cause notice. Although the period of contract is one year, which has already expired, as the respondent has ordered forfeiture of security deposit and bank guarantee and as filing of explanation by the petitioner on 06.08.2008 is not disputed, I deem, it is a fit case to set aside the impugned order. Accordingly, the order dated 05.08.2008 passed in proceedings No.PDS2/Movt./FG5 (845) Stage-II/2007-08, is set aside with a direction to the respondent to consider the matter afresh and pass appropriate orders within a period of six weeks from the date of receipt of this order. The bank guarantee and security deposit furnished by the petitioner shall not be encashed till such time. Writ petition is accordingly disposed of. No costs. ___________________ (R.SUBHASH REDDY, J) October 27, 2011 MRR