IMPORTANT POINT
The authority cannot review its own orders or impose further penalties without due process after a penalty has been imposed, as per the A.P. State Public Distribution System (Control) Order, 2008.

ORDER :

1. This writ petition is filed by the petitioner requesting to direct the respondent Nos.2 and 3 to continue the petitioner as Fair Price Shop dealer of Fair Price Shop No. 02, Tadi Hipperga Village, Madnoor Mandal, Nizamabad District by renewing her authorization.

2. Heard Sri V.Ravi Kiran Rao, learned Senior counsel appearing for the petitioner and learned Assistant Government Pleader for Civil Supplies appearing for the respondents and perused the entire material on record.

3. Learned Senior Counsel appearing for the petitioner submits that the petitioner is a Fair Price Shop dealer of Fair Price Shop No. 02, Tadi Hipperga Village, Madnoor Mandal, Nizamabad District. The respondent-authorities have conducted a surprise check on 23.03.2015 and also conducted a panchanama, alleging that there was additional stock of 35.70 quintals of rice and the same was placed at two or three places, thereafter, the respondent No. 3 submitted a report to the respondent No. 2, who is the Appointing and Disciplinary Authority of Fair Price Shop dealers under the A.P. State Public Distribution System (Control) Order, 2008. The respondent No. 2 issued a show-cause notice No. A3/2465/2015, dated 04.04.2014 and after receiving the said show-cause notice, the petitioner submitted explanation on 15.04.2015 denying the allegations made against her. Taking into consideration of the explanation submitted by the petitioner, the respondent No. 2 issued Memo No. A3/2465, dated 17.07.2015 and imposed penalty of Rs.3,000/- and further directed the petitioner to remit the same on or before 30.07.2015. In response to the said Memo, the petitioner paid the penalty vide Treasury Challan on 25.07.2015.

4. Learned Senior Counsel appearing for the petitioner further submits that in view of the compliance of the orders, the respondent No. 3 recommended for renewal of authorization of the petitioner, but the respondent No. 2, without any valid reasons, has failed to renew the authorization of the petitioner. In view of the same, the petitioner approached this Court and filed W.P.No. 30010 of 2015 on 14.09.2015. Pending writ petition, the respondent No. 2 issued impugned proceedings No. A3/2465/2015, dated 23.09.2015 cancelling the authorization of the petitioner with immediate effect and forfeiting the entire trade deposit in favour of the Government.

5. Learned Senior Counsel appearing for the petitioner further submits that basing on enquiry report alleged to have been submitted by the Assistant Supply Officer (CS), Bodhan and also basing on the complaints received from the card holders over telephone, the respondent No. 2 has passed the impugned orders and in the impugned orders, the respondent No. 2 has not considered the earlier order passed vide Memo in Lr.No. A3/2465/2015, dated 17.07.2015 imposing penalty and compliance of the said order by the petitioner. The respondent No. 2 failed to consider the provisions of Clause 5(5) of A.P. State Public Distribution System (Control) Order, 2008 and also the principles laid down while deciding the cases arising under the provisions of A.P. State Public Distribution System (Control) Order, 2008 and the respondent No. 2 has no power to review his own order which was complied by the petitioner. The Enquiry alleged to have been caused by the Assistant Supply Officer (CS), Bodhan was not known to the petitioner and the same was done behind back of the petitioner. Once the respondents have imposed penalty, it amounts to termination of disciplinary proceedings initiated by the respondent No. 2 and no further enquiry can be made ignoring the said order which was passed imposing penalty instead of cancellation of authorization of the petitioner. Without any fault on the petitioner, the respondent No. 2 has issued the impugned orders for cancellation of authorization and the same is arbitrary and illegal and contrary to the A.P. State Public Distribution System (Control) Order, 2008 and requested to set aside the impugned