E. Vishwanath Goud, v. The State Of Telangana

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE: AT HYDERABAD

FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA AND THE STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH WRIT PETITION No.25218 of 2015 BETWEEN:

E. Vishwanath Goud .. Petitioner AND The State of Telangana, rep.by its Ex-Officio Secretary-cumCommissioner of Civil Supplies Consumer Affairs, Food & Civil Supplies Department, Secretariat, Hyderabad, and 3 others.

.. Respondents DATE OF JUDGMENT PRONOUNCED: 12.08.2015.

SUBMITTED FOR APPROVAL:

THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE A. RAMALINGESWARA RAO

1. Whether reports of Local newspapers may be allowed to see the judgments? YES/NO

2. Whether the copies of judgments may be marked to Law Reporters/Journals. YES/NO

3. Whether their Ladyship/Lordship wish to see the fair copy of the Judgment ? YES/NO THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE A. RAMALINGESWARA RAO Writ Petition No.25218 of 2015 ORDER:

Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned Government Pleader for Civil Supplies appearing for the respondents. The petitioner was appointed as fair price shop dealer of shop

No.656 of Rajeev Shakthi Nagar, Subodhaya Colony, Kharmanghat in Saroornagar Mandal of Ranga Reddy District. While so, the Assistant Supply Officer, Circle-III, Saroornagar, along with the Deputy Tahsildar (Enforcement) inspected the shop on 19.03.2015 and found certain variations. A case under Section 6-A of the Essential Commodities Act was booked against the petitioner. The Assistant Supply Officer submitted a report to the third respondent-Revenue Divisional Officer, Saroornagar, on 26.03.2015. Based on the said report, the third respondent issued a show cause notice to the petitioner on 07.04.2015. On 08.04.2015 he passed an order in Progs.No.C/1944/2015 tagging on the cards to shop No.657 of Rajiv Shakti Nagar, Karmanghat. Challenging the same, the petitioner filed W.P.No.

10274 of 2015 and this Court passed an interim order suspending the said orders until further orders in WPMP No.13546 of 2015 in WP No.10274 of 2015. The petitioner also submitted the explanation on 15.04.2015. The third respondent suspended the authorization of the petitioner by order dated 08.05.2015. Challenging the same, though the petitioner filed an appeal, the present writ petition is filed.

In the facts and circumstances of the case, this Court feels that interest of justice would be met if the third respondent is directed to take up the enquiry and complete the same in view of the explanation submitted by the petitioner, within a period of thirty days from the date of receipt of a copy of this order, by giving due opportunity to the petitioner. The writ petition is, accordingly, disposed of. The miscellaneous Petitions, if any pending in this writ petition, shall stand closed. No order as to costs.

_______________________________ A. RAMALINGESWARA RAO, J Date: 12.08.2015 Isn