APHC010138542025 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) [3459] FRIDAY ,THE TWENTY FIRST DAY OF MARCH TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SMT JUSTICE SUMATHI JAGADAM WRIT PETITION NO: 7140/2025 Between: K Radhamma ...PETITIONER AND The State Of Andhra Pradesh and Others ...RESPONDENT(S) Counsel for the Petitioner: 1. GNANESWARA RAO MITTIREDDI Counsel for the Respondent(S): 1. GP FOR CIVIL SUPPLIES The Court made the following: ORDER: The present writ petition is filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India seeking the following relief: to issue a Writ of Mandamus or any other appropriate Writ, Order or declaring the action of the respondents not issuing Essential Commodities to the petitioner herein, for distribution to the card holders attached to shop No.0919002 of Sangam village and Mandal, SPSR Nellore District in spite of subsisting the petitioner’s F.P.shop authorization is illegal, arbitrary and in violation of principles of Natural Justice and contrary to the provisions of A.P. State Targeted Public Distribution System (Control) Order, 2018 and 2 JS,J W.PNo.7140/2025 consequently direct the respondent No.s 4 and 5 herein, to supply the Essential Commodities to the petitioner and allow her to distribute the same to the petitioner’s F.P shop and pass …. 2. The petitioner is a Fair Price Shop Dealer of Nellore District. The vigilance and enforcement officers have inspected the Petitioner’s Fair Price Shop on 06.03.2025 and stopped supplying Essential Commodities to the petitioner’s shop without there being suspension or cancellation. In support of his contention, the learned counsel for the petitioner relied on the judgment reported in Oleti Thirupathamma vs. District Supply Officer1. The relevant portion of the order is extracted as under: “15. It is one thing to say that when an order has been passed by the authority, the Court may pass an interim staying the operation thereof as a result whereof the dealer may carry on business, but it is another thing to say that a deliberate action in not supplying the essential commodities to an authorised dealer even though his authorisation or licence has not been suspended, should be allowed by this Court by refusing to grant a writ although in law he is entitled to. 16. A statutory authority, it is trite, must act within the four corners of the statute in terms of the statutory orders and procedure laid down to suspend the licence. As already noticed hereinbefore, the authorities under the relevant orders have power to suspend the authorisation or licence of the dealer. Without applying its mind and without taking recourse thereto, the Court should not normally permit the authorities, unless extraordinary situation exists, to allow them to do something indirectly, which they cannot do it directly. If a broad proposition to this effect is laid down, the same, in a given case may amount to abuse of the process of law. The High Court while exercising its jurisdiction under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, acts sentinel qui vive and thus it has to protect the citizen from arbitrary and capricious action of the executive. If the licensing authority themselves upon application of mind come to the conclusion that the irregularities committed by the fair price shop 1 2002 (1) ALD 577 (FB) 3 JS,J W.PNo.7140/2025 dealer would warrant suspension of his licence, it may do so. But, in our considered opinion, the authority without taking recourse to the said action, cannot, refuse to supply the essential commodities. In the event an order of suspension of licence is passed, the authorities will have to make an alternative arrangement. But, in a case of this nature, the card holders would be the worst sufferers inasmuch their essential commodities would not be supplied to them at all.” 3. In view of the above, the writ petition is disposed of, at the admission stage, directing the 3rd respondent to supply the essential commodities to the petitioner’s Fair Price Shop No.0919002 for the month of April and continue the same. However, it is open to the respondents to proceed with the enquiry in accordance with law. As a sequel, miscellaneous petitions, if any, pending shall stand closed. ___________________________ JUSTICE SUMATHI JAGADAM Date: 21.03.2025 sj 4 JS,J W.PNo.7140/2025 101 THE HONOURABLE SMT JUSTICE SUMATHI JAGADAM WRIT PETITION NO: 7140/2025 Date:21.03.2025 sj