C. Venkata Reddy, v. The State Of Andhra Pradesh,

HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE A.RAMALINGESWARA RAO WRIT PETITION No. 21031 of 2015 DATED 9th July, 2015 BETWEEN C. Venkata Reddy

...Petitioner

And The State of Andhra Pradesh, Rep. by its Secretary, Consumer Affairs, Food and Civil Supplies (CS.I) Department, Secretariat, Hyderabad and ors.

...Respondents.

HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE A.RAMALINGESWARA RAO WRIT PETITION No. 21031 of 2015 ORDER:

Heard learned Counsel for the petitioner and learned Government Pleader for the respondents.

The petitioner was appointed as Fair Price Shop Dealer for Shop No. 13 of Nallaballe Village, Muddanuru Mandal, YSR Kadapa District. While so, the Fair Price Shop of the petitioner was inspected by the Enforcement Deputy Tahsildar, Muddanaur, and a report was submitted on 14.11.2014 to the Tahsildar, Muddanur mandal, who in turn submitted a report to the second respondent on 10.02.2015, based on which, the second respondent issued show cause notice to the petitioner on 9.3.2015. The petitioner submitted his explanation on

18.3.2015. Being not satisfied with the said explanation, the second respondent suspended the dealership of the petitioner by order dated 4.4.2015 for a period of six months, pending enquiry. Challenging the said order, the present Writ Petition is filed.

This Court carefully perused the charges levelled against the petitioner and is of the opinion that the said charges require to be enquired into and such enquiry has to be completed within a period of thirty days. Since the petitioner had already submitted his explanation on 18.3.2015 the suspension of the dealership of the petitioner for a period of six months is unwarranted. In the circumstances, this Writ Petition is disposed of directing the second respondent to conduct an enquiry into the charges levelled against the petitioner keeping in view the explanation submitted by him and pass final order within a period of thirty days from the date of receipt of a copy of this order, by affording an opportunity of being heard to the petitioner. It is made clear that the suspension of the dealership of the petitioner as ordered by the second respondent in the impugned order dated 4.4.2015 is confined to the date of passing of the final order in the enquiry to be conducted by the second respondent as directed hereinabove.

The Writ Petition is accordingly disposed of. Miscellaneous petitions pending consideration if any in the Writ Petition shall stand closed in consequence. No order as to costs.

---------------------------------------------------

JUSTICE A.RAMALINGESWARA RAO Dated 9th July, 2015.

Msnrx