O R D E R:

This Writ Petition is filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India to issue a writ or direction preferably writ of mandamus declaring the order issued by the 4th respondent dt:07-08-2013 cancelling the petitioner's FP Shop authorization in respect of Shop No.3, Anakapalli Town and Mandal of Visakhapatnam, which was confirmed by the 3rd respondent in order dt:05-08-2014 and 2nd respondent (Revision) dt:7-3-2015 as illegal, arbitrary, discriminatory and violative of principles of natural justice and consequently set aside all the above orders and permit the petitioner to run above FP Shop as usual.

2. The case of the petitioner is briefly as follows:

The petitioner was appointed as a dealer of a fair price shop No.

3, Anakapalli Town and Mandal of Visakhapatnam District, being appointed in the year 1993. All of a sudden, the 4th respondent issued proceedings dated 17.11.2012 suspending the authorization on the ground that Assistant Supply Officer (ASO), Visakhapatnam, along with his team, had inspected the shop of the petitioner and noticed that V.Seshagiri Rao was conducting the shop on behalf of the petitioner as proxy and recommended for taking disciplinary action against the writ petition. Pursuant to the order suspending the dealership of the petitioner, a representation was submitted on 27.05.2013 stating that the petitioner was personally running the shop and Seshagiri Rao was assisting the petitioner for distribution of the commodities and, therefore, the allegation that he is a proxy to the petitioner is false. Without considering the explanation, the 4th respondent issued proceedings on 07.08.2013 cancelling the authorization of the petitioner on the very same allegation, contrary to the provisions under the APPDS (Control) Order, 2008. Therefore, the petitioner preferred appeal before the 3rd respondent, but without considering the plea, the appeal was dismissed on 05.08.2014. Again, the petitioner preferred revision before the 2nd respondent and the same was also dismissed on 07.03.2015 confirming the cancellation proceedings. On the basis of complaints given by G.Nageswara Rao and B.Nooka Raju, the revenue authorities directed the Assistant Supply Officer, Visakhapatnam to conduct detailed enquiry and to report the complaint. The ASO inspected 49 shops and submitted report to the 4th respondent that 15 shops out of 49 shops were being run by the benami dealers. Pursuant to the report, the 4th respondent issued show cause notice dated 17.11.2012 to the 15 fair price shop dealers calling for explanation. Out of 15 dealers, 9 dealers approached the High Court by filing writ petitions. Some writ petitions were allowed setting aside the show cause notices, while in some other writ petitions, interim orders suspending the impugned orders were granted. In respect of shops No.21 and 84 of same Anakapalli town, upon considering the representation of the dealers, their dealership was restored by imposing fine of Rs.1,000/- only on 26.04.2013 and 27.07.2013. Without appreciating the orders of the High Court and the restoration proceedings in some cases, since all show cause notices were on similar allegations, the claim of the petitioner was rejected by the authorities by confirming the proceedings of cancellation. The act of cancelling the dealership and its confirmation by the appellate authority and revisional authority are all illegal and in violation of principles of natural justice. In view of the dismissal of the revision, the authorities were trying to make permanent appointment in respect of the shop of the petitioner. Hence, this writ petition is filed.

3. Counter was filed by the Official respondents denying the allegations in the petition. It is submitted that the petitioner was issued authorization to run the fair price shop in the village in person, but on inspection it was found being run by a proxy dealer in violation of the conditions of the authorization issued and the provisions of the contro