SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
judgment-img

2011 Supreme(AP) 26

NOUSHAD ALI
Kamala Kumari – Appellant
Versus
The Sub-Collector – Respondent


Advocates appeared:
For the Petitioner:V.H.V.R.R. Swamy, Advocate.
For the Respondent: G.P. for Civil Supplies.

JUDGMENT :

Heard learned counsel appearing for the petitioner as well as the learned Government Pleader for Civil Supplies appearing for the respondents.

2. The petitioner, who has suffered cancellation of authorization to run a Fair Price Shop, has filed this writ petition challenging the order dated 29.9.2006 in Rc.B1/RP/02/2006, passed by the 3rd respondent-District Collector, Krishna District, confirming the order dated 21.10.2005 in Rc.B1/SRA/35/2004, passed by the 2nd respondent-Joint Collector, Krishna District, and the order dated 27.10.2004 in Rc.A7/2099/03, passed by the 1st respondent-Sub-Collector, Vijayawada.

3. The petitioner was an authorized Fair Price Shop dealer of Prasadampadu village, Vijayawada (Rural) Mandal, Krishna District. The Special Deputy Tahsildar (PDS), Vijayawada (Rural), submitted a report to the 1st respondent complaining that the petitioner has diverted 94.80 quintals of rice meant for free distribution under Food for Work (FFW) programme. Based on the said report, a show cause notice dated 20.10.2004 was issued calling for the explanation of the petitioner as to why her authorization should not be cancelled. The following is the charge enumerated






















Click Here to Read the rest of this document

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon telegram-icon
whatsapp-icon Back to top