I % - APHC010157642025 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) TUESDAY, THE TWELFTH DAY OF AUGUST TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SMT JUSTICE V.SUJATHv^^^^^^^ WRIT PETITION NO: 8193 OF 2025 ^ O'. tri Between: Age 48 years, H.No.5-81 Davala Nageshwara Rao, S/o, Bhushanam, Jaggapuram Vill Post Ediapadu Mandal, Palnadu District. ...Petitioner AND The State of Andhra Pradesh, Rep. by its Principal Secretary, Consumer Affairs, Food and Civil Supplies Department, Secretariat, Velagapudi, Amaravati, Guntur District. The District Collector Civil Supplies Wing, Collectorate Buildings, Narasarao Pet, Palnadu District, The Joint Collector Civil Supplies Wing, Collectorate Buildings, Narasaraopet, Palnadu District. The Revenue Divisional Officer CS, Narasaraopet, Palnadu District. The Tahsildar, Ediapadu Mandal, Palnadu District, The Dy Tahsildar Civil Supplies, Ediapadu Mandal, Palnadu District. 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. ...Respondents Petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India is filed praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed therewith, the High Court may be pleased to issue an appropriate order, direction or a writ particularly the writ of mandamus by declaring the action of the 4‘^ respondent in passing the interim suspension order dated 04.03.2025 suspending the authorization of FP shop of the petitioner as illegal, arbitrary, capricious besides against the provisions of Control Order, 2018 and consequently set aside the impugned suspension order dated 04.03.2025.^ iANO: 1 QF2025 A is filed praying that in the ^tion under Section 151 CPC cifcurnstances stated in the affidavit filed in support of the petition, the High ’Court may be pleased to suspend the operation of the suspension order dated 04.03.2025 enabling the petitioner to draw the stock pending disposal ' M-' of the main writ petition. lA NO: 2 OF 2025 Between: The Revenue Divisional Officer CS, Narasaraopet, Palnadu District. ...Petitioner/Respondent No.4^ AND 1. Davala Nngeshwara Rao, S/o. Bhushanam, Age 48 years, H.No.5-81, Jaggapuram Vill Post Ediapadu Mandal, Palnadu District. ...Respondent/Petitioner 2. The State of Andhra Pradesh, Rep. by its Principal Secretary, Consumer Affairs, Food and Civil Supplies Department, Secretariat, Velagapudi, Amaravati, Guntur District. 3. The District Collector Civil Supplies Wing, Collectorate Buildings, Narasarao Pet, Palnadu District, Joint Collector Civil Supplies Wing, Collectorate Buildings, Narasaraopet, Palnadu District. 5. The Tahsildar, Ediapadu Mandal, Palnadu District, 6. The Dy Tahsildar Civil Supplies, Ediapadu Mandal, Palnadu District. 4. The ...Respondents/Respondents Petition under Section 151 CPC is filed praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed in support of the petition, the High Court may be pleased to vacate the interim order dated on 01.04.2025 passed in I.A.No.1 of 2025 in W.P.No.8193 of 2025 and dismiss the present writ petition. — Counsel for the Petitioner: SRI T BALASWAMI Counsel for the Respondents: GP FOR CIVIL SUPPLIES The Court made the following order: f APHC010157642025 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) [3333] TUESDAY, THE TWELFTH DAY OF AUGUST TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SMT JUSTICE V.SUJATHA WRIT PETITION NO: 8193/2025 Between: 1.DAVALA NAGESHWARA RAO, S/O.BHUSHANAM, AGE 48 YEARS, H.NO.5-81, JAGGAPURAM VILL POST EDIAPADU MANDAL, PALNADU DISTRICT. ...PETITIONER AND 1.THE STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH, REP. BY ITS PRINCIPAL SECRETARY, SUPPLIES DEPARTMENT, AMARAVATI, GUNTUR DISTRICT. CONSUMER AFFAIRS, FOOD AND CIVIL SECRETARIAT, VELAGAPUDI, 2.THE DISTRICT COLLECTOR CIVIL SUPPLIES WING, COLLECTORATE BUILDINGS, NARASARAO PET, PALNADU DISTRICT, 3.THE JOINT COLLECTOR CIVIL SUPPLIES WING, COLLECTORATE BUILDINGS, NARASARAOPET, PALNADU DISTRICT. 4.THE REVENUE DIVISIONAL OFFICER CS, NARASARAOPET, PALNADU DISTRICT. 5.THE TAHSILDAR, EDIAPADU MANDAL, PALNADU DISTRICT, 6.THE DY TAHSILDAR CIVIL SUPPLIES, EDIAPADU MANDAL, VS,J W.P.No.8193of2025 PALNADU 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 to issue an appropriate particularly the writ of mandamus by declaring the action of the 4th respondent in passing the interim suspension order dated 04.03.2025 suspending the authorization of FP shop of the petitioner as illegal, arbitrary, capricious besides against the provisions of Control Order, 2018 and consequently set aside the impugned suspension order dated 04.03.2025 and pass lA NO: 1 OF 2025 order, direction or a writ 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 operation of the suspension order dated 04.03.2025 enabling the petitioner to draw the stock pending disposal of the main writ petition and pass lA NO: 2 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 be pleased may be pleased to vacate the interim order dated 01.04.2025 passed in I.A.No.1 of 2025 in W.P.No.8193 of 2025 and dismiss the present writ petition and pass Counsel for the Petitioner: 1.T BALASWAMI Counsel for the Respondent(S): 1.GP FOR CIVIL SUPPLIES The Court made the following: may on 3 VS,J W.P.No.8193 of 2025 ORDER: The present Writ Petition came to be filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India seeking the following relief;- “....to issue an appropriate order, direction or a writ particularly the writ of mandamus by declaring the action of the 4'" respondent in passing the interim suspension order dated 04.03.2025 suspending the authorization of FP shop of the petitioner as illegal, arbitrary, capricious besides against the provisions of Control Order, 2018 and consequently set aside the impugned suspension order dated 04.03.2025 ....’’ The petitioner was appointed as a permanent Fair Price Shop dealer in the year 2011. The said authorization has been renewed from time to time and the same is valid till March, 2027. Since the date of his appointment, the petitioner has been distributing the essential commodities to the cardholders without any complaint, either from the cardholders or from the respondent authorities. While the matter being so, on 02.02.2025, the 6^^ respondent has inspected the petitioner’s shop along with the V.R.O., Jaladi Village, and found that the closing balance of rice was shown in the e-POS device 27.93 Qtls, but on ground, a quantity of 34.00 Qtls of rice was found. Though a suitable explanation was given by the petitioner for the said variation, without even considering the explanation, the 6^^ respondent seized the stock and a panchanama was also prepared by the 6 respondent on 03.03.2025. Basing on the report submitted by the 6 2. 3. as th th 4 VS,J W.P.No.8193 of 2025 respondent, the respondent issued a show-cause notice on 11.02.2025, calling for an explanation from the petitioner and duly suspending the petitioner’s authorization. The petitioner submitted a detailed explanation on 25.02.2025 and also attended the enquiry before the 4*'^ respondent on 01.03.2025. 4. The grievance of the petitioner is that, in spite of submitting his explanation on 25.02.2025 as well as oral explanation on 01.03.2025, the 4'^ respondent, without considering the same, passed the impugned orders dated 04.03.2025, suspending the petitioner’s dealership. Challenging which, the present writ petition is filed. 5. When the writ petition came up for admission, on 01.04.2025, this Court passed the following interim order; “....there shall be interim suspension of the proceedings dated 04.03.2025 issued by the 4^^ respondent, for a period of eight (8) weeks.” The said interim order was extended by this Court from time to time. The 4'^ respondent has filed a detailed counter affidavit enclosing a vacate stay petition, wherein it is stated that the explanation submitted by the petitioner on 25.02.2025 has been referred to in the suspension order dated 04.03.2025 and it is also stated that the explanation of the delinquent dealer is not convincing. It is further stated that as per Clause 24(b) of the Control Orders, 2018 any fair price shop dealer aggrieved by an order of the appointing authority concerned denying the 6. 5 vs,J W.P.No.8193 of 2025 issue or renewal of authorisation (license) to a fair price shop dealer or cancellation of the authorisation (license) may appeal to the District Collector, the appellate authority, within thirty (30) days of the date of receipt of the order and the appellate authority shall, as far as practicable, dispose of the appeal within a period of sixty (60) days. The petitioner, instead of approaching the appellate authority, has straight away approached this Court by way of the present writ petition. Therefore, writ petition itself is not maintainable under law and as such. requested this Court to dismiss the writ petition. 7. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned Assistant Government Pleader for Civil Supplies for respondents. On a perusal of the impugned proceedings of the 4^'^ respondent dated 04.03.2025, it can be seen that though the petitioner submitted a 8. detailed explanation on 25.02.2025, after receiving the show-cause notice dated 11.02.2025 within the stipulated time, duly stating that he received the essential commodities for the month of February, 2025 on 01.02.2025 and transferred the received stocks to the login of the concerned MDU operator and also handed over to the ePOS machine to the MDU operator, and also that on 02.02.2025, the CSDT, Ediapadu inspected the ration shop and found 6.07 quintals of fortified rice, and 8 kgs (16 packets) of sugar variation in stocks and reported the same to the higher authorities against him witb/a malafide intention and also 6 VS,J W.P.No.8193 of 2025 th requested to restore the fair price shop to him. Though the 4 respondent has extracted the contents of the explanation given by the petitioner, except stating that “after examining the explanation of the delinquent dealer it is not convincing in nature”, no reasoning has been given as to how the explanation submitted by the petitioner is not convincing. This Court, in K. Sumathi Vs. State of Andhra Pradesh^, 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. 10. 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 the 3'^'^ respondent has issued the impugned proceedings suspending the petitioner’s authorization; as such, the same has to be set-aside. 11. It is also brought to the notice of this Court that, in pursuance of the interim order granted by this Court, the petitioner was supplied with the essential commodities by the respondents. In view of the same, the Writ Petition is allowed by setting aside the impugned proceedings dated 04.03.2025 passed the 4‘^ respondent. However, though the said proceedings were subject to finalization of the 9. so 12. ^2016 (3) ALT 10 (S.B.) 7 VS,J W.P.No.8193 of 2025 pending enquiry, admittedly no enquiry has been conducted till date. The respondents are at liberty to complete the enquiry within a period of four (4) weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. It is needless to say that the respondent authorities are directed to supply the essential commodities to the petitioner. There shall be no order as to costs. As a sequel, miscellaneous applications, pending, if any, shall also stand closed. Sd/- M. RAMESH BABU DEPUTY REGISTRAR //TRUE COPY// SECTION OFFICER To, 1. The Principal Secretary, Consumer Affairs, Food and Civil Supplies Department, State of Andhra Pradesh, Amaravati, Guntur District. 2. The District Collector Civil Supplies Wing, Collectorate Buildings Narasarao Pet, Palnadu District, 3. The Joint Collector Civil Supplies Wing, Collectorate Buildings Narasaraopet, Palnadu District. 4. The Revenue Divisional Officer CS, Narasaraopet, Palnadu District. 5. The Tahsildar, Ediapadu Mandal, Palnadu District. Secretariat, Velagapudi ’jrt'/.-- 6. The Dy Tahsildar Civil Supplies, Ediapadu Mandal, Palnadu District One CC to SRI. T BALASWAMI, Advocate [OPUC] Two CCs to GP FOR CIVIL SUPPLIES, High Court of Andhra Pradesh [OUT] Three CD Copies 7. 8. 9. PRK HIGH COURT DATED:12/08/2025 ORDER WP NO. 8193 OF 2025 ALLOWING THE WP, WITHOUT COSTS