C.V.NAGARJUNA REDDY
R. Sandhya Reddy – Appellant
Versus
Sub-Collector – Respondent
Utter lack of comprehension on the part of respondent No.1 has lead to passing of Order, dated 26-09-2012, in Proceeding No.G/I/321/2007, which is impugned in this Writ Petition.
The petitioner is a temporary fair price shop dealer of shop No.19, Parsi Village, Govindaraopet Mandal, Warangal District. Respondent No.1 has issued proceeding, dated 06-09-2012, cancelling the petitioner's temporary authorisation. Feeling aggrieved by the said Order, the petitioner filed WP.No.29287 of 2012. This Court, while allowing the said Writ Petition on the ground that the order of cancellation was not preceded by any notice, made the following observations:
"A reading of the impugned order does not show that any enquiry was held before cancelling the petitioner's temporary authorization. Respondent No.1 has merely relied upon a purported report dated 27.08.2008 submitted under the Essential Commodities Act, 1955. Under Clause 5(5) of the Andhra Pradesh State Public Distribution System (Control) Order, 2008 before cancelling an authorization, it is incumbent upon the appointing authority to issue a notice and hold an enquiry. As this procedure does not appear to have been followed as evi
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.