HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE NOUSHAD ALI Writ Petition No.23376 of 2011 Date: 31-10-2011 Between Bojjam Rajitha … Petitioner and The Government of Andhra Pradesh, Rep. by its Commissioner of Civil Supplies, C.S.Bhavan, Hyderabad and 3 others … Respondents HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE NOUSHAD ALI Writ Petition No.23376 of 2011 Order: In view of the short relief sought for in the writ petition as well as at the hearing, this writ petition is being disposed of at the stage of admission with the consent of Sri G.Vijayapal Reddy, learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned Government Pleader for Civil Supplies appearing for the respondents 1 to 4. 2. The petitioner is a fair price shop dealer of Dhumpalli, hamlet of Bhaigirthipet village, Regonda Mandal, Warangal district. The Revenue Divisional Officer, Mulug, the 3rd respondent herein, initiated proceedings under the provisions of A.P. State Public Distribution System (Control) Order, 2008 (for short ‘the Control Order’) on the basis of a report of the Tahsildar, Regonda Mandal, the 4th respondent herein, dated 01-12- 2010, wherein it was alleged that the petitioner contravened Condition No.17 (a), (b) and (c) of the Control Order. 3. Aggrieved by the said order, the petitioner preferred an appeal to the Joint Collector, Warangal, the 2nd respondent herein, on 05-7-2011 along with stay petition. As the 2nd respondent did not take up either the appeal or the stay petition for hearing, the petitioner has filed the present writ petition. 4. The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that even though the appeal has been preferred on 05-7-2011, the 2nd respondent has not considered the same so far and there is no likelihood that the 2nd respondent would take up hearing of the appeal within a reasonable time. Even though the petitioner has filed this writ petition complaining the inaction on the part of the 2nd respondent in considering the stay application, the 2nd respondent be directed to consider and dispose of the appeal within a time-frame in order to not to cause further prejudice to the petitioner. 5. Admittedly, the 3rd respondent suspended the licence as long back as on 13-12-2010 and there does not appear to be any dispute that the petitioner has submitted appeal on 05-7-2011. Considerable time has elapsed since then. There does not appear to be any valid reason to keep the appeal pending without disposing one way or the other ever since then. In matters of this nature, the statutory authorities are expected to deal with the matters expeditiously. 6. For the aforesaid reasons, I deem it appropriate to dispose of the writ petition, directing the 2nd respondent herein to consider and dispose of the appeal filed by the petitioner against the orders of the 3rd respondent vide Progs.No.G/2585/2010, dated 13-12-2010, as expeditiously as possible, preferably within a period of 6 (six) weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. No costs. ___________________ NOUSHAD ALI, J. 31st October, 2011. Ak HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE NOUSHAD ALI Writ Petition No.23376 of 2011 31st October, 2011. (Ak)