BOYA CHENNAPPA Vs. REVENUE DIVISIONAL OFFICER, ADONI

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS writ petition is filed for a Mandamus to set aside proceedings in RC(M).No.312/2012, dated 28.09.2012, of respondent No.1, whereby he has purported to suspend the petitioner 's fair price shop authorization.

(2.) I have heard Mr. K.V. Raghuveer, learned counsel for the petitioner, and the learned Assistant Government Pleader for Civil Supplies.

(3.) UNDER Clause 5 (5) of the Andhra Pradesh State Public Distribution System (Control) Order, 2008, the appointing authority is empowered to add to, amend, vary, suspend or cancel the authorization of a fair price shop dealer. Even though the power of suspension pending enquiry is not expressly conferred on the appointing authority, the Courts have recognized such power as concomitant to the power of suspension or cancellation of authorization as substantive penalty. Whenever serious allegations of omissions or commissions are brought to the notice of the appointing authority, he is entitled to exercise the power of suspending authorization pro tempore pending finalization of the disciplinary proceedings and passing final order. After concluding enquiry, the appointing authority is entitled to pass an appropriate order either cancelling the authorization or suspending the same for a specified period as substantive penalty. Ordinarily, the power of interim suspension of authorization pending enquiry is invoked before calling for explanation and holding an enquiry. In such cases, the appointing authority should specify that such power is exercised pending enquiry. After receiving explanation and holding enquiry, the appointing authority shall pass a final order either exonerating the dealer or imposing on him the appropriate penalty of substantive nature either cancelling or suspending the authorization depending upon the gravity of the allegations and the evidence available to substantiate such allegations.