K BALQEES BANU Vs. STATE OF A P

JUDGEMENT

(1.) HEARD Sri K.V.Raghu Veer, learned counsel appearing for the petitioners in all the writ petitions and the learned Government Pleader for Civil Supplies appearing for the respondents.

(2.) THE petitioners are the fair price shop dealers of various fair price shops in Kurnool district. The 3rd respondent -Revenue Divisional Officer, Adoni, Kurnool district suspended the authorisations of the petitioners purportedly basing on the report of the 4th respondent -Tahsildar (Civil Supplies), Adoni, whereunder he stated that the petitioners indulged in malpractice of seeding bogus/inactive ration cards with Aadhar cards while implementing the scheme of Aadhar seeding of ration cards. The version of the petitioners is that they never indulged in such malpractice as they are not associated with the scheme of Aadhar seeding of ration cards. According to the petitioners, the entire scheme was implemented by the Revenue officials themselves and the fair price shop dealers have no role to play in the said scheme, they only distribute the essential commodities to the card holders as per the ration cards issued by the Revenue authorities. As per the scheme, it is submitted that Aadhar card has to be linked up to the name of the person and the job is that of the Revenue officials and not that of the fair price shop dealers.

(3.) NEXTLY , it is submitted that the entire data including secret passwords relating to the Aadhar seeding of ration cards was in the computers of the offices of the respondents 3 and 4 for which the petitioners have no access at all. The contention of the petitioners is that at the instance of the persons in the opposite political group, the Revenue authorities have invented the cause to suspend the fair price shop dealers to accommodate the persons belonging to the opposite group. It is also contended by the petitioners that when the irregularity was reported in the Press, the Revenue officials under the apprehension that some severe action would be taken against them, resorted to suspending the authorisations of the petitioners. Therefore, they sought to set aside the suspension order in all these writ petitions on the ground that it was prompted by the mala fides.