V. Udayasree, v. The State Of Andhra Pradesh,

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT HYDERABAD

FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA AND THE STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH * * * * WRIT PETITION No.22695 OF 2015 Between:

V.Udayasree.

.. Petitioner And The State of Andhra Pradesh, Rep. by its Principal Secretary, Department of Civil Supplies, Secretariat, Hyderabad and others.

.. Respondents DATE OF JUDGMENT PRONOUNCED: 22-07-2015 SUBMITTED FOR APPROVAL:

HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE A. RAMALINGESWARA RAO

1. Whether Reporters of Local newspapers Yes/No may be allowed to see the Judgment?

2. Whether the copies of judgment may be Yes/No marked to Law Reporters/Journals

3. Whether Their Lordship wish to see the fair copy of the Judgment? Yes/No

HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE A. RAMALINGESWARA RAO WRIT PETITION No. 22695 of 2015 ORDER:

Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned Government Pleader for Civil Supplies. The Writ Petition is being disposed of at the stage of admission with the consent of parties. The petitioner was appointed as a fair price shop dealer of shop No.21, Chinna Ammapalem Village, V.V.Palem Mandal, Prakasam District. When the fair price shop was inspected by Food Inspector, kandukur on 10.04.2015, the petitioner was not present as she went to see her children studying at Ongole, and noticed that her brother-in-law, Sri Kasireddy Kota Reddy, was distributing essential commodities. Based on the report of the Food Inspector, kandukur, dated 14.04.2015, a show cause notice was issued to the petitioner on 23.04.2015.

The petitioner submitted her explanation on 06.05.2015.

After submission of her explanation, the third respondent passed an order on 25.05.2015 suspending the authorization of the petitioner. Against the said order, the petitioner preferred an appeal to the second respondent and the second respondent, by order dated 19.06.2015, called for the lower court record. When no orders were passed by the second respondent, the petitioner approached this Court by filing this Writ Petition. Since the appeal was preferred against the order of suspension dated 25.05.2015, learned counsel for the petitioner sought indulgence of this Court to consider the case of the petitioner on merits. In view of pendency of appeal before the second respondent, this Court is not inclined to consider the order of suspension passed on 25.05.2015. At this stage, learned

counsel submitted that, if the enquiry initiated by the third respondent is directed to be completed within a specified period of time, he would be satisfied with the relief.

In the circumstances, the third respondent is directed to complete the enquiry, after giving due opportunity to the petitioner, and pass final orders thereon, within a period of thirty days from the date of receipt of a copy of this order.

The Writ Petition is, accordingly, disposed of. Miscellaneous petitions, if any, pending in this writ petition shall stand disposed of. No order as to costs. _______________________________ A. RAMALINGESWARA RAO,J Date:22.07.2015 usd