Research › Search › Judgment

Andhra High Court · body

2022 DIGILAW 316 (AP)

H. B. Saraswathi v. State of Andhra Pradesh

2022-03-17

K.VIJAYA LAKSHMI

body2022
JUDGMENT Kongara Vijaya Lakshmi, J. - The Writ Petition is filed questioning the order of the 4th respondent issued in Rc.No.760/2015/B1, dated 17.07.2015 suspending the authorization of the petitioner with regard to Fair Price Shop No.28 of 74 Udegolam Village, Rayadurg Mandal, anantapur District as illegal and arbitrary. 2. The case of the petitioner is that she was appointed as permanent Dealer of the subject shop on 25.05.2008 and a show-cause notice-cum-suspension order was issued to the petitioner on 17.07.2015 alleging irregularities in distribution of essential commodities, basing on the report submitted by the 5th respondent dated 10.07.2015. The allegations levelled against the petitioner are not grave in nature warranting suspension and the petitioner has not violated any of the Clauses of Control Order and authorization. The petitioner submitted her explanation on 28.07.2015 through registered post acknowledgment due and also presented personally before the 4th respondent. as no enquiry is conducted till date, challenging the said suspension order, the present Writ Petition is filed. 3. When the Writ Petition came up for admission on 02.12.2015, an interim order was passed suspending the suspension order. It was also made clear that the said order would not preclude the respondents from issuing a show-cause notice and conducting enquiry into the allegations levelled against the petitioner. 4. When the matter was listed on 08.11.2021, learned Government Pleader sought time to get instructions in this matter. Today, learned Government Pleader has produced the written instructions given by the Tahsildar Sri Surya Pratap, Incharge Tahsildar of Rayadurg, which are dated 06.11.2021, bearing Rc.No.419/2015/CS. 5. as seen from the said instructions, the petitioner has resigned to the post of Fair Price Shop Dealer due to health problems on 29.02.2016 and thereafter, the subject shop was allotted to Smt. C. Renukamma and she also resigned in the month of august, 2019. after her resignation, the subject shop was again given to the petitioner by proceedings dated 31.08.2019 and that the petitioner is at present working as Dealer to the subject shop bearing No.1218028. The said instructions issued by Sri R. Surya Pratap, Tahsildar I/c, Rayadurg, does not whisper about the enquiry that is initiated against the petitioner. Learned Government Pleader does not have any instructions with regard to the pendency or otherwise of the enquiry initiated against the petitioner. The said instructions issued by Sri R. Surya Pratap, Tahsildar I/c, Rayadurg, does not whisper about the enquiry that is initiated against the petitioner. Learned Government Pleader does not have any instructions with regard to the pendency or otherwise of the enquiry initiated against the petitioner. The written instructions only show that the petitioner was given dealership of the subject shop vide proceedings dated 31.08.2019, which is the subsequent event after filing of the Writ Petition. 6. In view of the facts and circumstances, if the enquiry which is initiated against the petitioner pursuant to the suspension order dated 17.07.2005 is pending, the respondents are directed to complete the same strictly in accordance with law. If the disciplinary proceedings initiated against the petitioner are concluded and the allegations against the petitioner are disproved, the petitioner may be continued to run the subject shop pursuant to the proceedings dated 31.08.2019. It is made clear that if there is no valid authorization in favour of the petitioner as on today, she is not entitled to run the subject shop. 7. The Writ Petition is disposed of accordingly. No order as to costs. 8. as a sequel thereto, the miscellaneous petitions, if any, pending in this Writ Petition shall stand closed.