P VENKATA RAMANA Vs. GOVERNMENT OF ANDHRA PRADESH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) In this batch of writ petitions the validity of G.O.Ms.No. 19 Food & Agriculture (CS. II) Department, dated January 8, 1990 issued by the State Government amending the provisions of the Andhra Pradesh Scheduled Commodities (Regulation and Distribution by Card System) Order, 1973 (for short the Control Order) and the consequential notifications issued by the respective Revenue Divisional Officers/Sub-Collectors calling for applications for issue of authorisations to run fair price shops under the provisions of the Control Order is questioned.

(2.) The petitioners herein are those who have been granted authorisations to run fair price shops either by the District Collector or the Chairman, Zilla Abhivrudhi Sameeksha Mandali as the case may be under the Control Order, 19-73 as amended from time to time.

(3.) In exercise of the powers conferred by Section 3 of the Essential Commodities Act, 1955 read with the Order of the Government of India, Ministry of Food and Agriculture (Department of Food) G.S.R. No. 316(E) dated 20th June 1972 and the Order of the President of India G. S. R. No. 14 (E) dated 18th January 1973 and with the prior concurrence of the Central Government, the State Government made the Control Order, 1973 in G.O.Ms.No. 1088 Food & Agriculture (CS. V) Department, dated September 28, 1973 with a view to controlling the distribution of scheduled commodities. Clause 3 of the Control Order provides for issue of authorisation in favour of any institution or person to obtain and supply scheduled commodities to the cardholders, by the authorities mentioned therein (appointing authority). The authorisation is valid for a period of two years and it can be renewed on an application made in that regard. Clauses 4 to 16 which are not relevant for the purpose of these writ petitions, deal with the issue of supply cards to the members of the public, the distribution of scheduled commodities to the card holders by the authorised fair price shop dealers, the regulation of the issue of supply cards and the distribution of scheduled commodities and the conditions to be observed by the authorised fair price shop dealers. The authorisation shall be liable for suspension or cancellation as the case may be for any contravention of the provisions of the Control Order or the conditions of the autho-risation. A right of appeal is provided under Clause 17 to arty person aggrieved by an order passed under Clause 3 granting or refusing to grant authorisation to any person. A further right of revision is provided under Clause 18 against any order passed under Clause 17. The Control Order was amended from time to time by the State Government and in this batch of writ petitiors we are mainly concerned with the amendments made to Clauses 3, 17 and 18 of the Control Order, 1973 in G.O.Ms. No. 170, Food and Agriculture (CS.IV) Department, dated 18th April, 1984, G.O.Ms. No. 120, Food and Agriculture (CS. II) Department, dated 27th February, 1988, G.O.Ms.No. 300, Food and Agriculture (CS.II) Department, dated 5th may, 1989, G.O.Ms.No. 889, Food Agriculture (CS II) Department, dated 31st October, 1989 and G.O.Ms.No. 19, Food and Agriculture (CS II) Department, dated 8th January, 1990. Prior to the amendment of the Control Order in G.O.Ms.No. 120, dated February 27, 1988, so far as the districts were concerned, the Revenue Divisional Officer was conferred power to issue authorisation and in so far as the twin cities of Hyderabad and Secunderabad were concerned, the Assistant Supply Officer was competent to grant authorisation to run a fair price shop. The particulars of the amendments to the extent they are relevant are as shown in the following tabular form : <FRM>JUDGEMENT_29_ALT1_1991Html1.htm</FRM>