APHC010122692025 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) SMS 2. I FRIDAY, THE FIRST DAY OF AUGUST TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE T.C.D.SEKHAR WRIT PETITION No: 6452 OF 2025 Between: Darla Elia, S/o. Seshaiah, aged about 62 years, Occ: Fair Price Shop Dealer of Shop No.0785011, East Malapalli, Chilakaluripet, Chilakaluripet Mandal, Palnadu District. ...PETITIONER AND 1. The State of Andhra Pradesh, rep. by its Consumer Affairs and Velagapudi, Amaravati, Guntur District. 2. The Collector (CS), Palnadu District, Narasaraopet. 3. The Revenue Divisional Officer, Narasaraopet, Palnadu District. 4. The Tahsildar, Chilakaluripet Mandal, Chilakaluripet, Palnadu District. 5. The Civil Supplies Deputy Tahsildar, Chilakaluripet, Palnadu District. ...RESPONDENTS 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 to issue a Writ, Order or Direction more particularly one in the nature of WRIT OF MANDAMUS declare the action of the respondents 3 & 4 in forcibly taking resignation from the petitioner as Fair Price Shop Dealer of Shop No. 0785011, East Malapalli, Chilakaluripet and accepted the vide proceedings vide Rc.No.1873/2024-G dated 28-10-2024 of the 3'"^ respondent with an ulterior motive without conducting ah enquiry by issuing Principal Secretary, Civil Supplies Department, Secretariat, same notice to the petitioner is illegal, arbitrary, unjust and in Violation of principles of natural justice and consequently set aside the same by directing the respondents to permit the petitioner to continue as F.P. Shop dealer of Shop No.0785011, East Malapalli, Chilakaluripet, Palnadu District under the authorization held by the Petitioner. lA No: 1 OF 2025 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 suspend the proceedings vide Rc.No.1873/2024-G dated 28-10-2024 of the 3'^'^ respondent by directing the respondents to permit the petitioner to continue as F.P. Shop Dealer of Shop No.0785011, East Malapalli, Chilakaluripet, Palnadu District under the authorization held by the Petitioner, pending disposal of the main Writ Petition. Counsel for the Petitioner: SMT. Counsel for the Petitioner: SMT. KAVITHA GOTTIPATI Counsel for the Respondents: GP FOR CIVIL SUPPLIES The Court made the following order: APHC010122692025 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) 0M0 [3505] FRIDAY, THE FIRST DAY OF AUGUST TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE T.C.D.SEKHAR WRIT PETITION NO: 6452/2025 Between: 1.DARLA ELIA, S/0 SESHAIAH, AGED ABOUT 62 YEARS, OCC FAIR PRICE SHOP DEALER OF SHOP NO. 0785011, EAST MALAPALLI, CHILAK/^LURIPET, CHILAKALURIPET MANDAL, PALNADU DISTRICT ...PETITIONER AND 1.THE STATE OF AP, REP. BY ITS PRINCIPAL SECRETARY, CONSUMER AFFAIRS AND CIVIL SUPPLIES DEPARTMENT, SECRETARIAT, VELAGAPUDI, AMARAVATI, GUNTUR DISTRICT. 2.THE COLLECTOR CS, PALNADU DISTRICT, NARASARAOPET, 3.THE REVENUE DIVISIONAL OFFICER, NARASARAOPET, PALNADU DISTRICT. 4.THE TAHSILDAR, CHILAKALURIPET MANDAL, CHILAKALURIPET, PALNADU DISTRICT. 5.THE CIVIL SUPPLIES DEPUTY TAHSILDAR, CHILAKALURIPET, PALNADU DISTRICT. ...RESPONDENT(S): TCDSJ W.P.No.6452 of 2025 that 226 of the Constitution of India praying High Court may be pleased topleased to issue a Writ Order d“",he°acf^"'"?',f'' Mandamus eclare the action of the respondents 3 and 4 in forcibly takino OTSSofr °f Shop No 0785011, East Malapalli, Chilakaluripet and accepted the same vide proceedings vide Ro. No. 1873/2024-G dated 28 10-2024 ofTheTrd respondent with an ulterior motive without conducting an enquiry by rZ"°f unjust'aldl^ the ! i^stice and consequently set aside the same by directing the respondents continue as F.P. Shop dealer of Shop No. Chilakaluripet, Palnadu District under and pass or to permit the petitioner to 0785011, East Malapalli, the authorization held by him LA NO: 1 OF 207/^ Petition under Section circumstances stated in the affidavit filed i the High Court may be pleased Counsel for the Petitioner: 1.KAVITHA GOTTIPATI Counsel for the Respondent(S): 1.GP FOR CIVIL SUPPLIES The Court made the following: 151 CPC praying that in the in support of the petition. 3 TCDS.J W.P.No.6452 of 2025 THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE T.C.D.SEKHAR WRIT PETITION NO: 6452 of 2025 ORDER: The petitioner is permanent fair price shop dealer for shop No.0785011, East Malapalli, ChilakaluripetTown and Mandal. It is the further case of the petitioner that he has been distributing the essential commodities to the card holders without there being any complaint and to the utmost satisfaction of the respondent authorities. Further his authorization was being renewed from time to time and the same was valid till 31.03.2024. It is further case of the petitioner that he filed application seeking to renew his authorization by paying the requisite fee through challan dated 13.02.2024. It is further stated that pending consideration of his application for renewal, the incharge Revenue Inspector, Civil Supplies, Chilakaluripeta Mandal along with staff conducted inspection on 04.09.2024 and found certain variations in respect of stock maintained by the petitioner and thereafter the stock was seized on the same date and it was handed over to nearby fair price shop dealer. Pursuant thereto, a report was submitted to initiate action under Section 6A of the essential commodities Act, 1955 against the petitioner. It is further stated that, while drawing mediators report, the inspecting officers have obtained his signatures on blank papers. Thereafter the 4^'^ respondent sent proceedings dated 22.10.2024 to 4 TCDS,J W.P.No.6452of2025 the 3'''^respondent stating that the petitioner has tendered his resignation as dealer of fair price shop. The 3^^ respondent thereafter accepted the resignation of the petitioner and issued proceedings dated 28.10.2024 to that effect. Questioning the said proceedings dated 28.10.2024 issued by the 3'^'^ respondent, the present writ petition is filed. The 3'^^respondent filed counter affidavit stating that the petitioner through letter dated 21.10.2024 tendered his resignation as fair price shop dealer as he is suffering from heart related disease and he needs to undergo surgery and in view of the said ailment, he is unable to perform the duties as fair price shop dealer. It is further stated that the Tahsildar submitted report recommending to accept the resignation tendered by the petitioner and based on the same, the impugned proceedings dated 28.10.2024 is issued. It is further stated in the counter affidavit that the petitioner personally appeared before the 3'^'^ respondent and requested to accept the resignation in view of his ill-health. It is further stated that the contention of the 2. petitioner that his signature was obtained on white paper is totally false and the same is invented only for the purpose of filing the writ petition. It is further stated that the filing of the present writ petition is nothing but an afterthought and if at all the petitioner is aggrieved by 5 TCDS.J W.P.No.6452 of 2025 the order impugned, he has to file appeal as provided for under the Control Order, 2018. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned 3. Assistant Government Pleader for Civil Supplies. Perused the material available on record. It is the specific case of the petitioner that \A/hile conducting 4. inspection on 04.09.2024, the inspecting officials have taken signatures of the petitioner on blank papers and taking advantage of the same, a report has been sent to the respondent as if the petitioner tendered resignation on 21.10.2024. On perusal of the impugned order, while accepting the alleged resignation dated 21.10.2024 tendered by the petitioner, the 3^^ respondent did not make any endeavour to conduct enquiry as to whether the petitioner has actually tendered his resignation or not? Further on perusal of the counter affidavit in the present writ petition, the 3’'^ respondent has categorically stated that the petitioner appeared before him and requested to accept his resignation. Conspicuously, the order impugned is silent with regard to the appearance of the petitioner before him. From the above, it is clear that the counter filed by the 3^^ respondent is contrary to record. In the absence of such finding in the impugned order, the contention of the 3'^'^ respondent cannot be 6 TCDS.J W.P.No.6452oJ202S accepted and the same is hereby rejected. Apart from the duty is cast upon the 3'^ respondent to undertake same, a an enquiry as to whether the petitioner has actually resigned for the dealership In the case on hand, admittedly, the 3^^ respondent did not undertake or not. such enquiry. Therefore, the impugned order is liable to be set aside on this ground also. 5. In similar circumstances, this Court in the case of Sri Chinnareddigari Sambasiva Reddy vs. State of A.PT, while dealing with similar issue, held as under: "Ordinarily, no fair price shop dealer would like to quit his assignment. If such extra-ordinary desire is expressed by any dealer, it is incumbent upon the appointing authority to put the dealer on notice before accepting the resignation as, foul play by vested Interests cannot be ruled out. Therefore, I cannot appreciate the action of respondent purporting to ratify the hasty and unauthorised action of respondent No. 4 without even trying to get the confirmation from the petitioner whether he has sent his resignation out of his free will or the same is secured by any vested interests by force. The failure of respondent No. 3 to make an enquiry in this regard by issuing notice to the petitioner vitiates the entire action of respondent Nos. 3 and 4 in easing out the petitioner from the fair price shop dealership. /As respondent No. 3 has not properly exercised his jurisdiction in acting on the purported resignation of the petitioner, his action culminating in acceptance/ratifica tion of resignation of the petitioner is declared as Illegal and the impugned order is, accordingly, set aside. As the petitioner is inclined to continue as the fair price shop dealer, he shall be permitted to continue as such under the authorization held by him." No. 3 in as to ' 2015(1) ALD 645 7 TCDS,J W.P.No.64S2of 2025 6. On perusal of the said order, it is clear that the S^'^respondent without issuing any notice to the petitioner and without confirming the fact whether he has actually resigned or not, solely relying on the report submitted by the 4*^ respondent, issued the impugned proceedings. If the report submitted by the 4*'' respondent is accepted, the same would lead to chaos in public distribution system inasmuch as the dealership can be terminated or cancelled, based on the reports that may be submitted by the concerned Tahsildar. In such situation, the dealers will be left with no other option except to question the same before this Court. Therefore, unless enquiry is conducted by issuing notice to the person who tendered resignation, truth will not come out. For the reasons recorded supra, and by following the ratio laid down in the aforesaid judgment, the order impugned is hereby set aside and the writ petition is allowed. It is needless to state that the petitioner shall be permitted to continue as fair price shop dealer and the 3'''^ respondent is directed to supply essential commodities to the petitioner. 7. 8. This Court has come across various orders passed by the appointing authorities across the State wherein solely based on the report submitted by the concerned Tahsildar, proceedings are being 8 TCDSJ W.P.No.6452 of 2025 issued accepting the alleged resignation tendered by the fair shop dealers. While authorities are not confirming from the price accepting the resignation, the appointing concerned dealers as to whether they have actually tendered resignation or not. Further despite repeated orders passed by this Court, the concerned Revenue Divisional Officers are casually passing orders in routine manner without conducting enquiry. In view of the same, the 1=' respondent is hereby directed to issue necessary instructions/ guidelines to the appointing authority to strictly comply with the directions given by this Court. It is further made clear that any deviation of the above directions will be viewed seriously including initiation of contempt proceedings against the appointing authority, copy of this order to the 1®* respondent as to issue necessary instructions to the concerned in the matter. Registry is directed to mark so 9. Accordingly, this writ petition is allowed.There shall be no order to costs. Registry is directed to issue copy of this order to the as respondent No.1. As a sequel, pending applications, if any, shall stand closed ASSISTANT) registrar N OFFICER //true copy// SEC To, 1- The Principal Secretary, Consumer Affairs State of Andhra Pradesh District. (BY RPAD) & Civil Supplies Department, Secretariat, Velagapudi, Amaravati, Guntur 2. The Collector(CS), Palnadu District, Narasaraopet. 3. The Revenue Divisional Officer, Narasaraopet, Palnadu District. 4. The Tahsildar, Chilakaluripet Mandal, Chilakaluripet, Palnadu District. 5. The Civil Supplies Deputy Tahsildar, Chilakaluripet, Palnadu District. 6. One CC to Smt. Kavitha Gottipati, Advocate [OPUC] 7. Two CCs to GP for Civil Supplies, High Court of Andhra Pradesh [OUT] 8. Two CD Copies. ssb HIGH COURT DATED:01/08/2025 ORDER WP No.6452 OF 2025 ALLOWING THE WRIT PETITION WITHOUT COSTS