EDDE P RAJESHWARI Vs. JOINT COLLECTOR WARANGAL

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Petitioner is functioning as a fair price shop dealer of Guddelugulapally village, H/o Muddunur, Duggondi Mandal, Warangal District. The second respondent suspended her authorization through proceedings dated 25-11 -2004. The basis for her suspension is that the Mandal Revenue Officer, Duggondi Mandal, the third respondent, had reported that the petitioner committed certain irregularities in the distribution of kerosene for the month of October 2004.

(2.) The petitioner preferred an appeal, together with an application for stay, before the first respondent. Through an order dated 30-12-2004, the first respondent took the appeal on file and directed the second respondent to finalize the case within two weeks. He did not indicate as to whether any interim order is passed or not. The petitioner feels aggrieved by the same.

(3.) Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the second respondent proceeded as though the petitioner committed irregularities, without even issuing any show cause notice or ascertaining the facts from the petitioner. He contends that the suspension ordered by the second respondent is not as a measure pending enquiry and a reading of the order discloses that except directing an enquiry by the third respondent, the second respondent did not even contemplate issuance of a show cause notice to the petitioner. Learned counsel also submits that the first respondent did not apply his mind to the facts of the case and the order dated 30-12-2004 does not conform to either an order disposing of an application for stay, or an appeal.