THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE NOUSHAD ALI WRIT PETITION NO.19490 OF 2007 Between : V. Prabhakar, S/o. Sailu, Fair Price Shop Dealer of Shop No.1, Gavicherla Village, Sangem Mandal, Warangal District. …... PETITIONER And 1. The Revenue Divisional Officer, Warangal, Warangal District, and others. …....RESPONDENTS Counsel for the petitioner: Sri A. Prabhakar Rao Counsel for the respondents: G.P. for Civil Supplies The Court made the following. ORDER: The petitioner, a Fair Price Shop Dealer – 2 of Gavicherla village of Sangem Mandal, Warangal District, has filed this writ petition against the orders of the 1st respondent-Revenue Divisional Officer, Warangal, in proceedings No.E/4130/07, dated 3.09.2007 suspending the authorisation pending enquiry, as illegal. The Deputy Tahsildar, Hasanparthy inspected the shop of the petitioner on 29.08.2007 and 30.08.2007 and found that the petitioner was selling kerosene at his residence and other essential commodities at other place, unauthorisedly without obtaining any permission, and submitted a report stating that the petitioner violated the conditions of authorisation. Basing on the said report, the 1st respondent suspended the authorisation of the petitioner pending enquiry under the impugned orders. Heard Sri A. Prabhakar Rao, learned counsel for the petitioner and learned Government Pleader for Civil Supplies. The learned counsel for the petitioner would contend that the allegations contained in the report of the Deputy Tahsildar, Hasanparthy are not correct, and at any rate, the suspension of authorisation is not warranted as it would hamper the distribution of commodities to the public. The learned Government Pleader would submit that the impugned order is only interim in nature and the petitioner can as well establish his case in the regular enquiry. I am not inclined to express an opinion on the merits of the case. Whether the petitioner was selling the essential commodities from unauthorised premises and whether the same constitutes violation of the conditions of authorisation, are all the questions that are to be decided in the regular enquiry. This Court while admitting the writ petition, by orders in WPMP No.25076 of 2007 dated 18.09.2007 suspended the operation of the impugned order, thus enabling the petitioner to continue to run the shop. The petitioner asserts that by virtue of the said orders, he has been conducting the business. That being so it would not be appropriate to disturb the existing position, which would otherwise cause inconvenience to the public. Instead, the enquiry itself be directed to be completed within a time frame. In the circumstances, the 1st respondent is directed to complete the enquiry and pass appropriate orders as early as possible preferably within a period of six weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. Status quo obtaining as on today shall be maintained till the conclusion of the enquiry. The writ petition is disposed of as above. There shall be no order as to costs. ________________ NOUSHAD ALI, J. 9th December, 2010 Js.