APHC010143982025 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) [3459] TUESDAY, THE TWENTY FIFTH DAY OF MARCH TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SMT JUSTICE SUMATHI JAGADAM WRIT PETITION NO: 7538/2025 Between: Bysani Chandrakala ...PETITIONER AND The State Of Ap and Others ...RESPONDENT(S) Counsel for the Petitioner: 1. K SRINIVAS Counsel for the Respondent(S): 1. GP FOR CIVIL SUPPLIES The Court made the following: 2 JS,J W.P.No.7538/2025 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 direction declaring the action of the 2nd respondent in appointing the 4th respondent as a fair price shop dealer vide proceedings in R.C No. 203/2024-E dated 10.07.2024 without suspension or cancellation of the authorization of the petitioner as illegal, arbitrary and violation of Articles 14, 19 AND 21 of constitution of India and consequently direct the 2nd respondent to continue the petitioner as fair price shop dealer for Shop No. 0788016 situated at Ponnuru Town and Mandal, Guntur District, and pass such other orders…….” 2. The case of the petitioner is that on the report submitted by 3rd respondent, the 2nd respondent issued a show cause notice dated 10.07.2024. The petitioner has submitted her explanation on 18.07.2024. Without there being any cancellation/suspension of the dealership of the petitioner, the respondent authorities have appointed the 4th respondent for distribution of the essential commodities, which is contrary to the decision of this Court in Oleti Tirupathamma vs. District Supply Officer1, wherein it was held 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 1 2002 (1) ALD 577 3 JS,J W.P.No.7538/2025 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 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. Since the authorization of the petitioner has not been cancelled or suspended by following due procedure of law by conducting any enquiry, this Court deems it appropriate to dispose of the writ petition directing the respondents to continue the petitioner as fair price shop dealer for shop 4 JS,J W.P.No.7538/2025 No.0788016 of Ponnuru Town & Mandal, Guntur District. However, liberty is given to the respondents to proceed with the enquiry. 4. With the above direction, the Writ Petition is disposed of. There shall be no order as to costs. As a sequel, miscellaneous petitions pending, if any, shall stand closed. ______________________________ SMT JUSTICE SUMATHI JAGADAM Date: 25.03.2025 KAS 5 JS,J W.P.No.7538/2025 158 THE HONOURABLE SMT JUSTICE SUMATHI JAGADAM WRIT PETITION NO: 7538/2025 Date: 25.03.2025 KAS