Ms.Estharamma, 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.8710 of 2015 Between:

Ms. Estharamma ... Petitioner And

1. The State of Andhra Pradesh, rep. by Principal Secretary, Civil Supplies Department, Secretariat, Hyderabad, and others. ... Respondents DATE OF JUDGEMENT PRONOUNCED: 12-08-2015 SUBMITTED FOR APPROVAL:

THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE A. RAMALINGESWARA RAO

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

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

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

THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE A. RAMALINGESWARA RAO W.P.No.8710 of 2015 ORDER:

The petitioner was appointed as fair price shop dealer in respect of Shop No.6 situated at Gadeguduru Village, Rajupalem Mandal, Y.S.R. Kadapa District. The authorisation of the petitioner was valid up to 31.03.2015. While so, the Mandal Revenue Inspector, Rajupalem inspected the shop of the petitioner and noticed certain irregularities and based on the report dated 21.01.2014 submitted by the Mandal Revenue Inspector the 4th respondent issued proceedings dated 27.01.2014 suspending the authorisation of the petitioner. The petitioner challenged the said order in W.P.No.20654 of 2014 and the same was disposed of by this Court by order dated 23.07.2014 while setting aside the order of suspension directed the 4th respondent therein to complete the enquiry within a period of six weeks.

Thereafter, the 4th respondent issued a show cause notice on 19.08.2014 to which the petitioner submitted his explanation. Ultimately, the 4th respondent passed order dated 10.09.2014 cancelling the authorisation of the petitioner. The petitioner challenged the said order before the 3rd respondent by way of appeal. Since the 3rd respondent did not pass any orders, the petitioner once again approached this Court in W.P.No.28973 of 2014, which was disposed of by this Court on 24.09.2014 directing the appellate authority to dispose of the appeal within eight weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of the said order. Thereafter, the 3rd respondent dismissed the appeal on 5.03.

respondent. Aggrieved by the same, the present writ petition is filed. It is admitted by the learned counsel for the petitioner that against the impugned order there is a further appeal to the 2nd respondent and the petitioner is willing to pursue the said remedy. In the circumstances, the petitioner is given liberty to file an appeal before the 2nd respondent within a period of 30 days from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. However, the petitioner shall be permitted to continue as dealer for a period of thirty days in order to enable him to file appeal before the 2nd respondent. With the above directions the writ petition is disposed of. Pending miscellaneous petitions, if any, shall stand closed. No order as to costs.

_____________________________ A. RAMALINGESWARA RAO, J.

12th August, 2015 Note: Issue C.C. in 2 dyas.

(B/o) Js.