APHC010113632020 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH MONDAY, TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE THE HONOURABLE SMT JUSTICE V.SUJATHA WRIT PETITION NO: 7039/2020 Between: 1. SRI VIJAYA LAKSHMI DWACRA MAHILA SANGAM, REP.BY ITS PRESIDENT SMT. PILLA SRIDEVI, W/O P. APPALA NAIDU, AGED ABOUT 35 YEARS, OCC. FAIR PRICE SHOP DEALER (UNDER SUSPENSION), R/O. CHINTHALAPETA VILLAGE,GURLA MANDAL, VIZIANAGARAM DISTRICT. 1. THE STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH, CIVIL SUPPLIES DEPARTMENT, SECRETARIAT BUILDING, VELAGAPUDI, GUNTUR DISTRICT, A.P. REP. BY ITS SECRETARY. 2. THE DISTRICT COLLECTOR CIVIL SUPPLIES, VIZIANAGARAM, VIZIANAGARAM DISTRICT. 3. THE JOINT CO DISTRICT. 4. THE REVENUE DIVISIONAL OFFICER, VIZIANAGARAM SUB DIVISION, VIZIANAGARAM DISTRICT. 5. THE MANDAL CIVIL SUPPLIES OFFICER, MCSO), NELLIMARLA, VIZIANAGARAM DISTRICT 6. THE TAHSILDAR, GURLA MANDAL, 7. SRI LAXMI PARVATHI PARAMESWARA GROUP, REP.BY ITS MEMBER PATHIVADA RAMANAMMA, D/O. LATE PAIDI NAIDU, AGED ABOUT 25 YEARS, R/O. CHINTHALAPETA VILLAGE, GURLA IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) THE EIGHTEENTH DAY OF AUGUST TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SMT JUSTICE V.SUJATHA WRIT PETITION NO: 7039/2020 SRI VIJAYA LAKSHMI DWACRA MAHILA SANGAM, REP.BY ITS PRESIDENT SMT. PILLA SRIDEVI, W/O P. APPALA NAIDU, AGED ABOUT 35 YEARS, OCC. FAIR PRICE SHOP DEALER (UNDER SUSPENSION), R/O. CHINTHALAPETA VILLAGE,GURLA MANDAL, VIZIANAGARAM DISTRICT. ...PETITIONER AND THE STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH, CIVIL SUPPLIES DEPARTMENT, SECRETARIAT BUILDING, VELAGAPUDI, GUNTUR DISTRICT, A.P. REP. BY ITS SECRETARY. THE DISTRICT COLLECTOR CIVIL SUPPLIES, VIZIANAGARAM, VIZIANAGARAM DISTRICT. THE JOINT COLLECTOR, VIZIANAGARAM, VIZIANAGARAM THE REVENUE DIVISIONAL OFFICER, VIZIANAGARAM SUB DIVISION, VIZIANAGARAM DISTRICT. THE MANDAL CIVIL SUPPLIES OFFICER, MCSO), NELLIMARLA, VIZIANAGARAM DISTRICT THE TAHSILDAR, GURLA MANDAL, VIZIANAGARAM DISTRICT. SRI LAXMI PARVATHI PARAMESWARA GROUP, REP.BY ITS MEMBER PATHIVADA RAMANAMMA, D/O. LATE PAIDI NAIDU, AGED ABOUT 25 YEARS, R/O. CHINTHALAPETA VILLAGE, GURLA IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH [3333] THE EIGHTEENTH DAY OF AUGUST THE HONOURABLE SMT JUSTICE V.SUJATHA SRI VIJAYA LAKSHMI DWACRA MAHILA SANGAM, REP.BY ITS PRESIDENT SMT. PILLA SRIDEVI, W/O P. APPALA NAIDU, AGED ABOUT 35 YEARS, OCC. FAIR PRICE SHOP DEALER (UNDER SUSPENSION), R/O. CHINTHALAPETA VILLAGE,GURLA MANDAL, ...PETITIONER THE STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH, CIVIL SUPPLIES DEPARTMENT, SECRETARIAT BUILDING, VELAGAPUDI, GUNTUR THE DISTRICT COLLECTOR CIVIL SUPPLIES, VIZIANAGARAM, LLECTOR, VIZIANAGARAM, VIZIANAGARAM THE REVENUE DIVISIONAL OFFICER, VIZIANAGARAM SUB- THE MANDAL CIVIL SUPPLIES OFFICER, MCSO), NELLIMARLA, VIZIANAGARAM DISTRICT. SRI LAXMI PARVATHI PARAMESWARA GROUP, REP.BY ITS MEMBER PATHIVADA RAMANAMMA, D/O. LATE PAIDI NAIDU, AGED ABOUT 25 YEARS, R/O. CHINTHALAPETA VILLAGE, GURLA 2 MANDAL, VIZIANAGARAM DISTRICT, ...RESPONDENT(S): Petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed therewith, the High Court may be pleased toTo issue a writ of mandamus or any other appropriate writ or direction declaring the proceedings of the 3rd respondent passed in D.C. No.5/2020-Go dated 29.02.2020, as illegal, arbitrary, without assigning any reasons and non application of mind and one without jurisdiction and set aside the same and consequently direct the respondents to release the Essential Commodities to the petitioner for the F.P Shop No.0221032 of Chinthalapeta village of Gui la Mandal, Vizianagaram District IA NO: 1 OF 2020 Petition under Section 151 CPC praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed in support of the petition, the High Court may be pleased to direct the 3rd respondent to release the Essential Commodities to the petitioner for the F.P Shop No.0221032 of Chinthalapeta Village of Gurla Mandal, Vizianagaram District, for distribution to the Cardholders, by suspending the proceedings passed by the 3rd respondent vide D.C. No.5/2020-G6 dated 29.02.2020 IA NO: 2 OF 2020 Petition under Section 151 CPC praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed in support of the petition, the High Court may be pleased Pleased to take up the matter for urgent hearing and pass IA NO: 1 OF 2021 Petition under Section 151 CPC praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed in support of the petition, the High Court may be pleased pleased to vacate the interim orders dated 11.05.2020, passed in W.P.No. 7039 of 2020 and pass such Counsel for the Petitioner: 1. TADDI NAGESWARA RAO Counsel for the Respondent(S): 1. GP FOR CIVIL SUPPLIES (AP) 3 The Court made the following: ORDER: The present Writ Petition was filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India seeking the following relief:- “…. to issue a writ of mandamus or any other appropriate writ or direction declaring the proceedings of the 3rd respondent passed in D.C.No.5/2020-G6 dated 29.02.2020, as illegal, arbitrary, without assigning any reasons and non application of mind and one without jurisdiction and set aside the same and consequently direct the respondents to release the Essential Commodities to the petitioner for the F.P Shop No.0221032 of Chinthalapeta village of Gurla Mandal, Vizianagaram District and to pass such other order or orders ….” 2. The petitioner is the President of the Dwacra Mahila Sangam. Petitioner’s group was appointed as temporary fair price shop dealer of Chinthalapeta Village vide proceedings dated 19.05.2018 by respondent No.4 and the same was extended from time to time. While the matter being so, basing on the complaint submitted by the villagers of Chinthalapeta Village, respondent No.4 submitted a report to respondent No.2 and basing on the said report, respondent No.2 removed the petitioner group and appointed respondent No.7 to distribute the essential commodities to the card holders. 3. Challenging which, the petitioner constrained to file writ petition No.17994 of 2019 and, after hearing both sides, on 16.12.2019 this Court was pleased to allow the said writ petition by setting aside the impugned proceedings dated 07.08.2019, declaring the said proceedings as illegal. Consequent to the orders passed by this Court, petitioner was directed to continue as fair price shop dealer and 4 accordingly, essential commodities were released. Thereafter, once again due to political pressure, respondents have inspected petitioner’s shop on 15.02.2020. On verification of physical stock with enclosing balance, as per records i.e. E-Pos stock report, found minor variations in respect of PDS rice -7.0121, Midday Meals -0.650, Sugar -0.750 and +16.00 red gram dal. In addition to the variations, the inspecting officials also detected that the petitioner failed to exhibit stock-cum-price board at the fair price shop premises and the petitioner is running the fair price shop at unauthorized premises. For which, the card holders of Chinthalapeta Village has submitted an explanation stating that excess stock of 16 kgs of red gram dal has occurred due to non-delivery of stock to some of the card holders, in spite of obtaining biometrics. But, however, without assigning any reasons, duly, stating that the explanation submitted by the card holders is not satisfactory, respondent No.3 has passed impugned orders dated 29.02.2020 suspending the petitioner’s authorization, pending enquiry. Challenging which, the present writ petition was filed by the petitioner. 4. When the writ petition came up for admission, on 11.05.2020, this Court passed the following interim order: Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and he mainly contended that earlier writ petitioner filed W.P.No.17994 of 2019, questioning the proceedings in RC.No.177/2019-G1, dated 07.08.2019, replacing the petitioner with the unofficial respondents therein, for Fair Price Shop No.02210332 of Chintalapeta village, Gurla Mandal, Vizianagaram District. After hearing both sides, this Court allowed the Writ Petition and 5 set-aside the impugned order dated 07.08.2019, declaring the said proceedings are illegal. Consequent to the orders passed by this Court, the petitioner shall be continued as Fair Price Shop dealer and essential commodities were released to distribute of the members of the fair price shop. Again as per the report of the Tahsildar, Gurla Village, the present impugned orders are passed by respondent No.2 in DC.No.5/2020-G6, dated 29.2.2020 by highlighting the variations and irregularities of the stock in fair price shop. According to the impugned order, the dealer has failed to supply the stock at the fair price shop premises and the fair price shop is running at unauthorized premises. Apart from the above, having a small variations in the stock, the temporary dealership of Smt.Pilla Sridevi petitioner herein, who is temporary dealer of fair price shop No.0221032 of Chintalapeta village, Gurla Mandal, has been suspended vide RC.No.177/2019-G1, dated 07.08,2019. Learned Assistant Government Pleader appearing for respondents, sought time to get instructions in this matter. In view of the submissions made by the learned counsel for the petitioner and on verification of the record, the impugned orders were passed basing on the untenable grounds, hence the impugned orders are suspended and respondents are directed to release the stock to the petitioner. 5. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned Assistant Government Pleader for Civil Supplies representing the respondents. 6. The 3rd respondent herein filed a counter affidavit, duly enclosing vacate stay, wherein it is stated that initially, basing on the complaint made by the villagers, after duly conducting enquiry, the petitioner was placed under suspension, pending enquiry. But, thereafter, it was restored, as per the orders of this Court. It is further stated that thereafter, during inspection, the Vigilance officials have noticed that the petitioner is maintaining the fair price shop in unauthorized premises and 6 also failed to exhibit stock-cum-price board at fair price shop premises. On credible information received from the villagers, an inspection was conducted on 15.02.2020 on the petitioner’s shop and found that there is a variation of 16 Kgs of red gram dal. Basing on the report of the Tahsildar, petitioner’s dealership was suspended, pending enquiry and the distribution of essential commodities is entrusted to one Smt. Pathivada Ramanamma on temporary basis. It is further stated that under Clause 12(p)(3) of the Andhra Pradesh Targetted Public Distribution System (Control) Order, 2018, it has been stipulated that the fair price shop dealer shall make available scheduled commodities physically, as per the balances shown in the electronic point of sale generated prints to cross check the variation (excess/deficit) in stocks. As the petitioner has violated the said clause and also failed to exhibit stock-cum-price board, violating the clause 12(n) of Andhra Pradesh Targetted Public Distribution System (Control) Order, 2018, petitioner was placed under suspension. 7. On perusal of the impugned proceedings of the 3rd respondent dated 29.02.2020, it can be seen that, even without calling for explanation from the petitioner, by only considering the explanation submitted by the petitioner during the course of inspection that excess stock of 16 Kgs red gram dal was occurred due to non-delivery of stock to some of the card holders in spite of obtaining biometrics and without assigning any reasons as to his dissatisfaction over the explanation submitted by the 7 petitioner, the 3rd respondent has issued the impugned proceedings dated 29.02.2020 suspending the authorization of the petitioner, which is against the principles of natural justice. In K. Prabhavathi v. State of A.P., represented by its Principal Secretary and others1, it was observed as under: “11. Since the appointing authority acts as a quasi judicial authority, he must give cogent reasons specifying the need for placing the dealer under suspension pending disciplinary enquiry. The mere cryptic order that the report of the inspecting authority reveals a prima-facie case against the petitioner of his committing certain irregularities and thereby violating the Control Order, 2018 is not sufficient to justify suspension. The suspension order shall not just signify the subjective satisfaction of the Officer but it should demonstrate compulsive need for suspension. It should be noted that not all follies of a dealer, invariably require his suspension pending enquiry. Therefore, appointing authority must carefully differentiate between the prima-facie case for holding disciplinary enquiry and a compulsory case which requires not only disciplinary enquiry but also suspension pending enquiry.” 8. Even this Court, in K. Sumathi Vs. State of Andhra Pradesh2, under similar circumstances has categorically held that the reasons for coming to the conclusion should reflect in the order and it is not sufficient to say for the quasi-judicial/administrative authority or the State that the explanation offered by a dealer is not convincing. 9. Once the petitioner submits an explanation pursuant to a show cause notice, the concerned authorities must evaluate it thoroughly and shall issue a reasoned order to justify their actions. Without doing so, the 1 2020 SCC OnLine AP 755 2 2016 (3) ALT 10 (S.B.) 8 3rd respondent has issued the impugned proceedings suspending the authorization of the petitioner, as such, the same has to be set-aside. 10. Accordingly, the Writ Petition is allowed by setting aside the impugned order issued by the 3rd respondent dated 29.02.2020. It is needless to say that the respondents are at liberty to initiate action against the petitioner, if at all, they find any variation in future. There shall be no order as to costs. As a sequel, Interlocutory Applications pending, if any, shall stand closed. __________________ JUSTICE V.SUJATHA Dated: 18.08.2025 MDP