B DADAPEERA Vs. REVENUE DIVISIONAL OFFICER ANANTAPUR DISTRICT

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The petitioner has assailed the order of the 2nd respondent-Tahsildar, Pamidi Mandal, Anantapur District, dated 20.07.2011 passed in Rc.No. 195/2011 suspending the petitioner's authorization to run a fair price shop, as arbitrary and illegal. The brief facts are that the petitioner was appointed as the fair price shop dealer of shop No. 9 of Pamidi Village and Mandal, Anantapur District. The Mandal Revenue Inspector-I inspected the shop on 11.07.2011 and found that the authorization of the petitioner was valid upto 31.03.2010 (as per the copy of the licence filed as material paper by the petitioner) and that the same has not been renewed. He also found that there was shortage of 1 Kg sugar on ground. Prior to the inspection, a vehicle bearing registration No. AP 02X7277 was inspected by the Station House Officer, Pamidi and found transporting 138 packets of P.D.S. rice (each 50 kgs), out of which 58 packets allegedly belonged to shop Nos. 3 and 9. Taking cognizance of the said report, the 2nd respondent suspended the petitioner's authorization pending enquiry, against which the present writ petition has been filed.

(2.) Heard Sri Kothapalli Ram Mohan Chowdary learned counsel for the petitioner and learned Government Pleader for Civil Supplies appearing for the respondents.

(3.) Learned counsel for the petitioner contends that the petitioner has not committed any irregularities as alleged against him and the impugned order is without jurisdiction, in as much as the Tahsildar is not competent to suspend the authorization pending enquiry. It is submitted that the Revenue Divisional Officer, who is the disciplinary authority, is alone competent to suspend the authorization pending enquiry and to pass final orders.