M FAZILATH BEGUM Vs. JOINT COLLECTOR KURNOOL

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This writ petition is filed for a mandamus to set aside order, dated 18.08.2010, of respondent No.2, whereby she has cancelled the petitioner's fair price shop authorisation in respect of shop No.ll of Bilakalagudur Village, Gadivemula Mandal, Kurnool District.

(2.) At the hearing, there is no representation for the petitioner.

(3.) In my opinion, this action on the part of respondent No.2 is wholly impermissible in law. The scope of appeal before respondent No.2 was confined to the legality and validity of order, dated 08.05.2010, of respondent No.3, suspending the petitioner's authorisation. If respondent No.2 did not find merit in the appeal filed by the petitioner, she could only dismiss the appeal. Thus far and no further. But respondent No.2 has travelled beyond the scope of the appeal in cancelling the petitioner's fair price shop authorisation on finding that the charges framed against her by respondent No.3 were proved. Even though respondent No.2 is the appointing-cum-disciplinary authority and has the power of cancelling the petitioner's authorisation, if the charges against her are proved, such an action can be taken only after giving the petitioner an opportunity of being heard with reference those charges. The impugned order does not show that the petitioner was put on notice to the charges framed by respondent No.3 nor her explanation was called for and considered.