Allowed

Sri G. Sharan Kumar, v. The Collector (Cs)

Telangana HC11 Dec 2012WP/31005/2011

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Court set aside an order indefinitely suspending the petitioner's authorization as a dealer under the PDS scheme, violating a statutory 90-day limit. The Court directed the authorities to allow the petitioner to submit an explanation to a show cause notice before passing orders.

What did the court decide?

Impugned order of 05.11.2011 set aside; petitioner permitted to file explanation within four weeks.

Sri G. Sharan Kumar, Vs The Collector (Cs) — Pension and Retirement Benefits | Telangana HC (2012)

¶1

HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE R. SUBHASH REDDY

¶2

WRIT PETITION No.31005 of 2011

¶3

Dated: 11.12.2012

¶4

Between:

¶5

Sri G.Sharan Kumar.

¶6

…..Petitioner

¶7

And

¶8

The Collector (CS), Medak District & others.

¶9

…..Respondents

¶10

HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE R. SUBHASH REDDY

¶11

WRIT PETITION No.31005 of 2011

¶12

ORDER :

¶13

This writ petition is filed questioning the order dated 05.11.2011, passed by the 3^rd respondent-Tahsildar, suspending the authorization of petitioner until further orders.

¶14

While admitting the writ petition on 24.11.2011, this Court granted interim stay and the said order continued all along. Even a perusal of the impugned order, dated 05.11.2011, shows that the said order was passed suspending the authorization of petitioner until further orders, only on the allegation of one cardholder during Ratchabanda program before the local member of Legislative Assembly, that the petitioner was not maintaining proper timings for distribution of essential commodities.

¶15

Under the scheme of The A.P.State Public Distribution System (Control) Order, 2008, if any allegations are made against a dealer, the Tahsildar is empowered to suspend the authorization of such dealer

¶16

only for a period of 90 days and he is not empowered to suspend the authorization until further orders, as has been done in the impugned order. As much as the allegation made against the petitioner is only with regard to maintenance of timings for distribution of essential commodities, and further, as show cause notice is already issued to him on 16.11.2011 by the 2^nd respondent, calling for his explanation, I deem it appropriate to set aside the order, dated 05.11.2011, passed by the 3^rd respondent in proceedings No.C/4838/2011, and permit the petitioner to file his explanation within a period of four weeks from today, to the show cause notice, dated 16.11.2011, if not already filed. On filing such explanation, the 2^nd respondent shall consider the same and pass appropriate orders on its own merits by giving an opportunity of hearing to the petitioner.

¶17

The writ petition is allowed with the directions indicated above. No costs.

¶18

As a sequel, WPMP.Nos.38464 and 38465 of 2011 and WVMP.No.2012 of 2012 shall stand closed.

¶19

__________________________ R. SUBHASH REDDY, J

¶20

11^th December 2012 ajr

Sri G. Sharan Kumar, v. The Collector (Cs)

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Sri G. Sharan Kumar, v. The Collector (Cs)

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Palukuri Venkata Surya Bangarraju, Vs The Joint Collector ( Civil Supplies)

Godavarthi Satyanarayana Vs The Collector and District Magistrate

Smt.P.Sasi Lakshmi Vs The District Collector (Cs)

G.Sudhakar Reddy Vs The Singareni Collieries Company Limited, Rep. by its

M/s. American Organics (India) Company Vs The Commissioner 8s Director of Agriculture

M/s Manikanta Lorry Transport, Vs The Singareni Collieries Company Limited, Rep.