PALLE PEERAIAH Vs. DISTRICT COLLECTOR WARANGAL

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS writ petition is filed for a certiorari to quash order, dated 09.02.2010, of respondent No.3, as confirmed in orders, dated 17.06.2010, and 12.11.2010, of respondent Nos.2 and 1 respectively.

(2.) I have heard Sri A.Ravinder, learned counsel for the petitioner, and the learned Assistant Government Pleader for Civil Supplies.

(3.) IN the counter affidavit, respondent No.3 has stated that having regard to the bad history of the petitioner, he has suspended the authorization after giving a show-cause notice and opportunity to the petitioner to submit his objections. It is axiomatic that an order of suspension can be either interim or final in nature. IN contrast to an order of cancellation, an order of suspension can be for a limited period irrespective of whether such an order is interim or final in nature. IN the light of the stand taken by respondent No.3, the impugned order passed by him can be construed as final in nature. However, curiously respondent No.3 failed to indicate the period for which the petitioner's authorization is suspended, even if the same was intended to be as a measure of penalty. The impugned order thus suffers from a serious flaw rendering itself illegal and unenforceable.