Sirigiri Madhavi v. The Revenue Divisional Officer, Ongole, prakasam District & Anr.

THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE GOPALA KRISHNA TAMADA WRIT PETITION No.16504 of 2009 ORDER: This writ petition is filed by the petitioner seeking a Writ of Mandamus to declare the inaction of 2nd respondent in passing orders on a stay petition filed by her along with an appeal, against the order of 2nd respondent, in Rc.No.1131/G/2009, dated 07.07.2009, suspending her authorisation in respect of fair price shop No.10 of Medarametla village, Korisapadu Mandal, Prakasam District, as illegal and arbitrary.

The facts of the case, in brief, are that the petitioner was appointed as a fair price shop dealer in respect of shop No.10 of Medarametla village, Korisapadu Mandal, Prakasam District. On 03.07.2009 the Food Inspector, Addanki along with his staff has inspected the fair price shop of the petitioner, found shortage of 4.37 quintals of PDS rice, filed a case against her under Section 6-A of the Essential Commodities Act 1955 (for short 'the Act'), and later sent a report dated 04.07.2009 to the Revenue Divisional Officer, Ongole - 1st respondent. In pursuance of the said report, the 1st respondent has issued a show cause notice to the petitioner, vide Rc.No.1131/G/2009, dated 07.07.2009, to show cause as to why her authorisation should not be cancelled, within a period of seven days from the date of receipt of the said notice, and on the even date, he has also issued proceedings in Rc.No.1131/G/2009 suspending her authorisation, pending enquiry into the case. Questioning the same, the petitioner filed an appeal before the Joint Collector, Prakasam District at Ongole - 2nd respondent, on

20.07.2009, seeking to set- aside the order of the 1st respondent dated 07.07.2009, along with a petition seeking suspension of operation of the said order, pending disposal of the appeal. Aggrieved by the inaction of the 2nd respondent on the stay petition, the petitioner filed this writ petition.

Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner as well as the learned Government Pleader for Civil Supplies.

The learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that the 1st respondent has issued a show cause notice to the petitioner and also passed an order suspending her authorisation on the even date i.e. on 07.07.2009, that pendency of the proceedings under Section 6-A of the Act does not warrant suspension of authorisation of the petitioner, that despite the petitioner filed an appeal before the 2nd respondent along with a petition seeking suspension of operation of the impugned order of the 1st respondent dated

07.07.2009, the 1st respondent has not passed any order thereon so far, and that therefore, prays to allow this writ petition.

Having regard to the fact that the authorisation of the petitioner was suspended by the 1st respondent, by proceedings in Rc.No.1131/G/2009, dated 07.07.2009, and the appeal filed by the petitioner on 20.07.2009 is very much pending with the 2nd respondent, this Court is of the view that this writ petition can be disposed with a direction to the 2nd respondent to dispose of the appeal filed by the petitioner.