Smt. Pathakamuri Venkata Ratnam 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.22903 OF 2015 Between:

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

.. Respondents DATE OF JUDGMENT PRONOUNCED: 24-07-2015 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.22903 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 Gosukonda Agraharam Village, Marripudi Mandal, Prakasam District. When the respondents did not supply stock for the month of July, 2014, the petitioner got issued a notice dated 06.08.2014 through his counsel asking the reason for non-supply of stock. When the petitioner came to know that the required quota was supplied to incharge dealer, he filed W.P.No.25566 of 2014. The said Writ Petition was disposed of and, pursuant thereto, the third respondent restored the authorization of the petitioner on 26.11.2014. While so, the fair price shop of the petitioner was inspected on 02.04.

2014 and the petitioner submitted her explanation to the show cause notice issued pursuant to the inspection conducted. The authorization of the petitioner was suspended on 15.05.2015. The petitioner states that, though he filed appeal, along with stay petition, the same has not considered. Hence the writ petition.

This Court perused the order of suspension dated 15.05.2015 which contained one charge relating to variation in stock. The petitioner had already submitted her explanation, and the enquiry is yet to be completed.

In the circumstances, this Court is not inclined to interfere with the enquiry process but the third respondent is directed to conduct an enquiry, by giving due opportunity to the petitioner, and

complete the same, 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:24.07.2015 usd