ORDER : The cause of action in all these writ petitions revolves around Fair Price Shop No.0440022 of Nadurubada Village, Rayavaram Mandal of East Godavari District. 2. W.P.No.10094 of 2020 is filed by the petitioner Midthipati Jyothi Lakshmi against the cancellation of her permanent Fair Price Shop authorization by proceedings dated 22.5.2020; W.P.No.4566 of 2021 is filed by Latha Mahila Shakthi Sangham represented by its President Punnapu Pavani, temporary Fair Price Shop Dealer questioning the proceedings dated 5.2.2021 (wrongly typed as 5.2.2020 but signed on 5.2.2021) restoring the authorization of the 7th respondent/petitioner in W.P.No.10094 of 2020, inter alia, raising similar facts and question of law. Hence, these writ petitions are heard together and passed this common order. 3. The petitioner Kumari Midthipati Jyothi Lakshmi in W.P.No.10094 of 2020 filed 56 pages affidavit in support of her writ petition raising various issues arraying 23 respondents altogether. However, the brief facts relevant to the issue involved in this case are that the petitioner was appointed as Fair Price Shop Dealer of Fair Price Shop No.0440022, Nadurubada Village, Rayavaram Mandal, East Godavari District and was issued authorization in the year 1998-2000 and the same was renewed from time to time and finally authorization is extended up to 31.3.2021. 4. The Assistant Supply Officer, Amalapuram had submitted a report stating that on credible information that Kumari M. Jyothi Lakshmi, Fair Price Shop Dealer of Nadurubada village is not properly distributing the essential commodities to the cardholders. The Civil Supplies team consisting of Civil Supplies Deputy Tahsildar, Tahsidlar’s Office of Rayavaram, Mandapet-II along with Revenue officials under the supervision of Assistant Supply Officer, Amalapuram inspected the Fair Price Shop on 4.5.2020 and found that one women Kumari Midthipati Jyothi Lakshmi, dealer of the Fair Price Shop is distributing the essential commodities to the cardholders. In the presence of mediators the inspection team has verified stocks available in the Fair Price shop. When compared to the closing balance stock as per the e- Pos report as on 2.5.2020 with the available ground balance, it is found that there is shortage of rice of 367 Kgs and Sugar 88.260 Kgs. When the dealer was asked with regard to variations, she has not given any reply and accepted her guilt. When compared to the closing balance stock as per the e- Pos report as on 2.5.2020 with the available ground balance, it is found that there is shortage of rice of 367 Kgs and Sugar 88.260 Kgs. When the dealer was asked with regard to variations, she has not given any reply and accepted her guilt. In view of variation in the stocks, the inspection team has construed that the dealer has contravened the provisions of Andhra Pradesh State Targetted Public Distribution (Control) Order, 2018 (in short “Control Order, 2018) and suspended the petitioner’s Fair Price Shop authorization by proceedings dated 08.05.2020 and simultaneously issued show cause notice dated 08.05.2020 enumerating the charges and asked her to submit explanation. The petitioner without submitting explanation approached this Court by filing W.P.No.8523 of 2020. During the pendency of the said writ petition, by proceedings dated 22.05.2020, the Joint Collector/Additional District Magistrate, East Godavari, Kakinada cancelled the petitioner’s authorization. When the same is brought to the notice of this Court, the said writ petition is closed on 2.6.2020 giving liberty to the petitioner to question the said proceedings, if so aggrieved, before the appropriate authority. Instead of availing the appeal remedy before the District Collector and Appellate Authority, East Godavari District within a period of 30 days, the petitioner approached this Court by filing Writ Petition No.10094 of 2020. 5. During the pendency of the disciplinary proceedings against the permanent Fair Price Shop Dealer, the petitioner in W.P.No.4566 of 2021 Smt Punnapu Pavani, President of Latha Mahila Shakthi Sangham was appointed as temporary Fair Price Shop Dealer of Fair Price Shop No.0440022 of Nadurubada village, Rayavaram Mandal on 09.06.2020 by the Collector (CS), East Godavari District, Kakinada and she was continuing as such without any complaint. The respondents have not taken any action as per the interim order dated 24.6.2020 in W.P.No.10094 of 2020 passed by this Court, wherein this Court directed the respondent authorities to consider the representations of the petitioner dated 23.4.2020, 24.4.42020, 29.04.2020, 30.4.2020, 1.5.2020 and 4.5.2020 and for non compliance of the same, C.C.No.806 of 2020 is filed and thereupon, the Joint Collector, East Godavari, Kakinada vide proceedings dated 5.2.2020 passed an elaborate order considering all the representations of the petitioner in WP.No.10094 of 2020 and as per the letter of the Commissioner of Civil Supplies dated 31.1.2021, having held that the explanation given in the said representations is not convincing and accepted one of the contentions of the petitioner in one of the representation and the Joint Collector opined that it will be appropriate to give benefit of doubt to the petitioner. The inspection is made on 4.5.2020 and report submitted on 2.5.2020, which is not correct. In fact, the inspection is made on 4.5.2020 and compared ground balance with the stock as per the e-Pos report as on 2.5.2020 and the disciplinary authority – cum - Revenue Divisional Officer, Ramachandrapuram is directed to restore the Fair Price Shop authorisation immediately and to inform action taken report to the Joint Collector without fail. Accordingly, in view of the pendency of the C.C.No.806 of 2020, the Revenue Divisional Officer issued orders restoring the authorization to the petitioner in WP.No.10094 of 2020 vide proceedings dated 6.2.2021 and the same was acknowledged by the petitioner. Accordingly, C.C.No.806 of 2020 was closed on 10.2.2021. Questioning the impugned restoration order dated 6.2.2021 passed by the 4th respondent, W.P.No.4566 of 2021 is filed by the temporary Fair Price Shop Dealer and the impugned order was suspended by this Court on 25.2.2021. 6. W.P.No.4566 of 2021 is filed by Smt Punnapu Pavani contending, inter alia, that she was appointed as temporary dealer on 9.6.2020 by the Collector (CS), East Godavari, Kakinada as the permanent Fair Price Shop Dealer’s authorisation was suspended pending enquiry. 6. W.P.No.4566 of 2021 is filed by Smt Punnapu Pavani contending, inter alia, that she was appointed as temporary dealer on 9.6.2020 by the Collector (CS), East Godavari, Kakinada as the permanent Fair Price Shop Dealer’s authorisation was suspended pending enquiry. The 4th respondent Joint Collector, East Godavari District under the guise of interim order dated 24.6.2020 passed in W.P.No.10094 of 2020 considering the representations of the permanent Fair Price Shop Dealer said to have been submitted in pursuance of the suspension and show cause notice, even though without power or authority as per G.O.Ms.No.11 dated 9.9.2020 wherein provisions of the Control Order, 2018 are amended delegating the powers of appointing authority to the Sub Collectors/ Revenue Divisional Officers concerned. Hence, the Revenue Divisional Officer, Ramachandrapuram is the only competent authority to consider the representations of the petitioner in W.P.No.10094 of 2020. However, the Joint Collector (CS)/Additional District Magistrate after elaborately considering all the issues having held that (1) the permanent Fair Price Shop Dealer is not distributing the essential commodities properly to the cardholders; (2) diverted PDS rice of 267 Kgs and sugar 88 Kgs to the black market for pecuniary gain; (3) She is not following the Fair Price shop working hours prescribed by the Government; (4) The dealer is behaving rudely with the cardholders and threatening them; (5) The dealer is not maintaining good relations with the public; (6) The Dealer is disrespecting the volunteers by using unparliamentary language and threatening them; (7) The dealer is distributing the essential commodities with the less weight and (8) The dealer is reluctant to receive the suspension and show cause notice issued by the Joint Collector, East Godavari District and no reply has been submitted by her even after lapse of 11 days of affixing notice to the wall of the dealer’s shop, which clearly indicates that the Dealer is disobeying the orders and instructions of the Government thereby, violated the provisions clause 8 (14), clause 12 (j) and Condition No.25 of the Authorisation issued under the provisions of the Control Order, 2018. The authorisation of Kumari Midthipati Jyothi Laskhmi, petitioner in W.P.No.10094 of 2020 is cancelled duly intimating her that against the order of cancellation, appeal lies to the District Collector, appellate authority, East Godavari District within a period of 30 days from the date of receipt of the order. The authorisation of Kumari Midthipati Jyothi Laskhmi, petitioner in W.P.No.10094 of 2020 is cancelled duly intimating her that against the order of cancellation, appeal lies to the District Collector, appellate authority, East Godavari District within a period of 30 days from the date of receipt of the order. Under the guise of the interim order in W.P.No.10094 of 2020 the very same authority i.e., Joint Collector even after delegation of powers to the Sub Collector/ Revenue Divisional Officers as per G.O.Ms.No.11 dated 9.9.2020 passed the impugned order dated 5.2.20200 and directed the disciplinary authority, RDO, Ramachandrapuram to restore the Fair Price Shop immediately. The petitioner in W.P.No.4566 of 2021 in para-10 of the writ affidavit filed in support thereon specifically pleaded that the 7th respondent herein Kumari Midthipati Jyothi Lakshmi, who is permanent Fair Price Shop Dealer is a practicing advocate and in support of her contention, she filed service certificate dated 11.3.2020 issued by the Bar Association, Ramachandrapuram and also the enrolment certificate of Roll No.AP/1274/2007 issued by the Bar Council of Andhra Pradesh at Hyderabad on 9.8.2007. 7. The 7th respondent Kumari Midthipati Jyothi Lakshmi, in reply to the said contention having accepted the same at running page No.29 of the counter filed in W.P.No.4566 of 2021 running into Pages 31, states that she was enrolled as an advocate but not practicing law since 2009 onwards and as she has submitted certificate of practice it was understood that she is practicing advocate. She further states that some of the practicing advocates on par with her, have been appointed as Fair Price Shop Dealers of Shop No.0440009 and 04400019 of Rayavaram Mandal i.e., Sri Ch.Krishna Murthy and Sri D. Rama Rao who are the practicing advocates at Ramachandrapuram and Anaparthi and in those circumstances she submitted an application of suspension of practice to the Bar Council of Andhra Pradesh by handing over originals on 16.2.2021 after restoration of her authorisation by the 5th respondent. Being a law abiding citizen, she has complied with the provisions of the Advocates Act, 1961 as well as the Control Order, 2018 and she is entitled to continue as Fair Price Shop Dealer since she was appointed as permanent Fair Price Shop Dealer in the year 1998. 8. Being a law abiding citizen, she has complied with the provisions of the Advocates Act, 1961 as well as the Control Order, 2018 and she is entitled to continue as Fair Price Shop Dealer since she was appointed as permanent Fair Price Shop Dealer in the year 1998. 8. The petitioner being a practicing advocate is not qualified to be appointed as Fair Price Shop Dealer under the provisions of the Control Order, 2018 and as the irregularities committed by the petitioner in distribution of essential commodities to the cardholders are grave, her authorization was cancelled and the same is the subject matter of Writ Petition No.10094 of 2020. Pending the said writ petition, as per the interim order dated 24.6.2020 directing the respondents to consider the representations, the 4th respondent in W.P.No.4566 of 2021 issued proceedings dated 5.2.2020 restoring the authorisation of the petitioner in W.P.No.10094 of 2020 without notice to Smt Punnapu Pavani, petitioner in W.P.No.4566 of 2021 who is a temporary dealer who is entitled for notice as per orders of the Full Bench of this Court in the case of M.Vanaja Vs. B. Balaseshanna and others, 2007 (4) ALD 388 (FB), 9. In view of the above discussion, W.P.No.4566 of 2021 is allowed setting aside the order dated 5.2.2020 passed by the 4th respondent restoring the Fair Price Shop authorization as illegal and arbitrary and W.P.No.10094 of 2020 is disposed of giving liberty to the petitioner to approach the District Collector, East Godavai District, by way of comprehensive appeal, within a period of four weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order and on submission of such appeal against the cancellation order dated 22.5.2020, the District Collector is directed to consider the same without reference to any delay, on its own merits independently, uninfluenced by any of the observations made above and as per law as expeditiously as possible within a period of eight (8) weeks thereafter and pass a reasoned order and communicate the same to the petitioner. It is needless to say that Smt Punnapu Pavani also be given opportunity to put forth her case. No order as to costs. As a sequel thereto, miscellaneous petitions, if any, pending shall stand closed. 10. It is needless to say that Smt Punnapu Pavani also be given opportunity to put forth her case. No order as to costs. As a sequel thereto, miscellaneous petitions, if any, pending shall stand closed. 10. W.P.No.22356 of 2021: This writ petition is filed by Midthipati Jyothi Lakshmi, permanent Fair Price Shop Dealer of Fair Price Shop No.0440022 questioning the impugned proceedings dated 31.8.2021 passed by the 5th respondent Revenue Divisional Officer, Ramachandrapuram as per the interim order passed by this Court on 25.2.2021 in W.P.No.4566 of 2021, wherein this Court suspended the proceedings dated 5.2.2020 passed by the Joint Collector restoring the Fair Price Shop to the petitioner who was a permanent dealer. When the 4th and 5th respondents failed to implement the interim order dated 25.2.2021 passed in W.P.No.4566 of 2021, in spite of dismissal of Writ Appeal No.464 of 2021 against the said order, the 8th respondent is constrained to file C.C.No.689 of 2021 for non compliance of the interim order dated 25.2.2021. In view of the contempt proceedings, the 5th respondent - Revenue Divisional Officer passed the impugned notice dated 31.8.2021 in the present writ petition and in view of the impugned notice, the Contempt Case is closed on 1.9.2021. 11. In view of the order passed by this Court in W.P.No.10094 of 2020 allowing the petitioner therein to prefer an appeal before the District Collector against the cancellation of her Fair Price Shop dealership in respect of Shop No.0440022, no further adjudication is required in this writ petition as the order impugned is passed as per the interim orders of this Court dated 25.2.2021 passed in W.P.No.4566 of 2021. The petitioner having filed 18 pages affidavit in support of the writ petition failed to show any legal infirmities in the impugned proceedings dated 31.8.2021. As the impugned proceedings dated 31.8.2021 is the outcome of the interim order passed by this Court and subsequent Contempt Case and dismissal of the Writ Appeal, mere challenge of the subsequent proceedings passed by the authorities, without availing the effective alternative remedy of appeal before the District Collector, the writ petition is not maintainable. The petitioner in W.P.No.22356 of 2021 is directed to approach the District Collector by way of appeal. The petitioner in W.P.No.22356 of 2021 is directed to approach the District Collector by way of appeal. As long as the cancellation of the petitioner’s authorisation is in force, this Court cannot adjudicate the validity of the subsequent proceedings issued as per the orders of this Court dated 25.02.2021. In view of the above discussion, the writ petition is devoid of any merits and is liable to be dismissed. Accordingly this Writ Petition is dismissed. No order as to costs. As a sequel thereto, miscellaneous petitions, if any, pending shall stand closed. 12. W.P.No.10640 of 2021: This writ petition is filed by Kumari Midthipati Jyothi Lakshmi declaring the action of the respondents in not rectifying the variations in the stock shown in the e-Pos machine attached to the Shop No.0440022 through AePDS Web Portal and not considering the several representations in respect of the proceedings dated 12.3.2021 issued by the 2nd respondent as illegal and arbitrary. 13. In view of the impugned proceedings dated 5.2.2021 challenged in W.P.No.4566 of 2021, are passed as per the interim order dated 24.06.2020 passed in W.P.No.10094 of 2020, considering various representations of the petitioner, with regard to the discrepancies mentioned in e-Pos machine was also considered and passed the said impugned order and in view of the subsequent cancellation of the petitioner’s authorisation against which the petitioner is directed to file an appeal before the District Collector for consideration, the petitioner is permitted to raise all issues of discrepancies mentioned in e-Pos machine and variations in the stocks could also be adjudicated in the said appeal. In view of the above discussion, this writ petition is disposed of accordingly. 14. Accordingly, W.P.No.4566 of 2021 is allowed, W.P.No.10094 of 2020 is disposed of, W.P.No.22356 of 2021 is dismissed and W.P.No.10640 of 2021 is disposed of. There shall be no order as to costs. As a sequel thereto, miscellaneous petitions, if any, pending shall stand closed.