1 APHC010466362022 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) [3332] THURSDAY, THE TWENTY NINETH DAY OF JANUARY TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY SIX PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE RAVI CHEEMALAPATI WRIT PETITION NO: 29587/2022 Between: Smt Shaik Afreen ...PETITIONER AND The State Of Andhra Pradesh and Others ...RESPONDENT(S) Counsel for the Petitioner: 1. M S P KAMARAJU Counsel for the Respondent(S): 1. GP FOR CIVIL SUPPLIES 2. POLURI VASU RAGHAVENDRA RAO The Court made the following order: Aggrieved by the action of the respondents in restoring the authorization of F.P.Shop No.1133017 situated in Nandimandalam village, Pendlimarry Mandal, YSR Kadapa District to the 5th respondent, the present writ petition is filed. 2. Heard Sri Appasani Vineeth, learned Assistant Government Pleader for Civil supplies. On earlier occasion, there was no representation for the petitioner, today also, there is no representation for the petitioner. 2 3. Learned Assistant Government Pleader for Civil supplies submitted that, the 5th respondent is the permanent dealer of the subject fair price shop and upon his suspension, the petitioner was appointed as temporary dealer for a period of three months. He further submitted that, aggrieved by his suspension, the 5th respondent herein filed W.P.No.6089 of 2022 which was disposed of by this Court on 25.04.2022 directing the authorities to continue to supply the essential commodities to the petitioner therein, pending enquiry that was initiated against him and further directed to conclude the enquiry as expeditiously as possible. He further submitted that, as per the said directions, the RDO had directed the tahsildar to distribute the essential commodities to the 5th respondent herein but the enquiry is still pending. He further submitted that, the writ petition may be disposed of directing the authorities to conclude the enquiry and the authorities will take steps accordingly. 4. As could be culled out from the facts of the case, the petitioner did not question the orders passed by this Court in W.P.No.6089 of 2022 dated 25.04.2022 neither by filing a review petition nor an intra court appeal. Admittedly, the said order had attained finality. Therefore, the RDO has rightly issued proceedings dated 08.08.2022. However, as the authorities have an intention to take steps in concluding the enquiry pending against the 5th respondent herein, instead of keeping this writ petition pending, this Court is inclined to dispose of the same with the following direction: 3 ‘The respondent authorities concerned are directed to conclude the enquiry pending against the 5th respondent as expeditiously as possible not later than three(03) months from the date of receipt of copy of this order.” Accordingly, the Writ Petition is disposed of. No costs. Miscellaneous applications, pending if any, shall stand closed. ___________________________ JUSTICE RAVI CHEEMALAPATI BRS