APHC010130852025 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) [3331] MONDAY ,THE SEVENTEENTH DAY OF MARCH TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE SUBBA REDDY SATTI WRIT PETITION NO: 6680/2025 Between: Vijaya Geetha Oil Company ...PETITIONER AND The Union Of India and Others ...RESPONDENT(S) Counsel for the Petitioner: 1. K SATYANARAYANA MURTHY Counsel for the Respondent(S): 1. The Court made the following: ::ORDER:: Heard Sri K. Satyanarayana Murthy, learned counsel for the petitioner; Smt. M. Uma Devi, learned standing counsel for respondent No.1 and Sri S.V.V.Siva Ram, learned counsel for respondents 2 to 4. 2. The above writ petition is filed seeking comprehensive relief. 3. The facts in brief, are that the petitioner, a retail outlet dealer, has been running the business for 24 years without any remark or malpractices on its part. While the matter stood thus, an inspection was conducted on 16.11.2023 and the inspection team observed certain irregularities in respect of one of the dispensing units out of three dispensing units, at the outlet. Even after one year, the subject dispensing unit was neither restored nor renewed. Therefore, the petitioner made representation requesting the authorities to conduct regular inspections and to review or restore said dispensing unit for regular operations. Since the representation did not evoke any response, the petitioner filed W.P.No.1756 of 2025 and the said writ petition was disposed of on 03.02.2025 directing respondents 2 and 3 therein to consider the petitioner’s representation/explanation dated 29.12.2024 as per the guidelines and pass appropriate orders after providing opportunity of hearing to the petitioner, if required, within four weeks from the receipt of a copy of the said order. Thereafter a show cause notice, vide reference VJA/MDG/VIJAYA GEETHA dated 28.02.2025 (Ex.P1), was issued. 4. Learned counsel for the petitioner would submit that to the show cause notice (Ex.P1), the petitioner submitted a detailed explanation dated 07.03.2025 (Ex.P2). However, no action has been taken to revoke the suspension order. He would further submit that the authorities may terminate the petitioner’s dealership, without following the due process of law. 5. Learned standing counsel for respondents 2 to 4 would submit that respondent No.3 will strictly adhere to clause (8) of the Marketing Discipline Guidelines (for short ‘the Guidelines’). 6. Thus, as seen from the material available on record, there is no dispute regarding the petitioner filing W.P.No.1756 of 2025; disposal of the same; issuance of notice under Ex.P1 and submission of explanation by the petitioner, under Ex.P2. 7. The learned counsel for the petitioner has drawn the attention of this Court to various issues. However, they being disputed questions of fact, it is not advisable to adjudicate the said issues at this juncture. 8. Since the petitioner submitted an explanation dated 07.03.2025 touching all the issues, learned respondent No.3 or any other appropriate authority shall consider (Ex.P2) and pass a reasoned order strictly adhering to clause (8) of the Guidelines. 9. With the above direction, this writ petition is disposed of at the admission stage, with the consent of learned counsel on either side. No costs. As a sequel, pending miscellaneous petitions, if any, shall stand closed. ___________________________ JUSTICE SUBBA REDDY SATTI Date: 17.03.2025 IKN 116 THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE SUBBA REDDY SATTI WRIT PETITION NO: 6680/2025 Date : 17.03.2025 ikn