APHC010284752025 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) [3333] MONDAY, THE FIRST DAY OF SEPTEMBER TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SMT JUSTICE V.SUJATHA WRIT PETITION NO: 14360/2025 Between: 1. B ANURADHA, W/O. S.BALAJI NAIK, AGED ABOUT 36 YEARS, OCC FAIR PRICE SHOP DEALER OF F.P.SHOP.NO.L244065, SUNNAPUGUTTA THANDA, H/O.KUMMARAVANDLAPALLI VILLAGE, KADIRI MANDAL, SRI SATHYA SAI DISTRICT. ...PETITIONER AND 1. THE STATE OF AP, REP., BY ITS PRINCIPAL SECRETARY, CIVIL SUPPLIES DEPARTMENT, SECRETARIAT BUILDINGS, VELAGAPUDI, GUNTUR DISTRICT. 2. THE JOINT COLLECTOR, SRI SATYA SAI DISTRICT, PUTTAPARTHI. 3. THE REVENUE DIVISIONAL OFFICER, KADIRI REVENUE DIVISION, KADIRI, SRI SATYA SAI DISTRICT 4. THE TAHASILDAR, KADIRI RURAL MANDAL, KADIRI. 5. THE DEPUTY TAHSILDHAR CIVIL SUPPLIES, KADIRI, SRI SATYA SAI DISTRICT. 6. THE VILLAGE REVENUE OFFICER, KUMMARAVANDLAPALLI VILLAGE, KADIRI RURAL MANDAL, KADIRI ...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 topleased to issue an appropriate writ order or direction more particularly one in the nature of Writ of Mandamus declaring the action on part of the respondents No. 3 to 6 in locking (seizing) the Fair Price Shop No. 1244065 in Sunnapugutta Thanda, H/o. Kummaravandlapalli Village, Kadiri 2 VS,J W.P.No.14360 of 2025 Rural Mandal, Sri Sathya Sai District and also seizing E-Pos Machine allotted to me on 12.06.2025 through the Panchanama, dated 12.06.2025 by not renewing the authorization for the Fair Price Shop No. 1244065 in Sunnapugutta Thanda on the application NO.FPSR2505074445167 made on 0(J.05.2025 and consequential action of not supplying the essential commodities to me for public distribution without any reason whatsoever since 02.06.2025 and issuing a second Show Cause Notice in Rc.No.F/269/2025, dated 27.05.2025 (served on 02.06.2025), having issued a Show Cause Notice, dated 15.05.2025 on the same charge as arbitrary, illegal. colourable exercise of power apart from being violative of the fundamental rights guaranteed to me under Articles 14, 19 and 21 of the Constitution of India, and consequently direct the respondents to dated 06.05.2025Consider the application. ina. FPSR2505074445167 for renewal of the authorization of the Fair Price Shop No. 1244065 in Sunnapugutta Thanda, H/o. Kummaravandlapalli Village, Kadiri Rural Mandal, Sri Sathya Sai District and renew the same till 31.03.2026 b. to permit me to supply the essential commodities for public the authorization of the Fair Price Shop No. 1244065 in Thanda, H/o. Kummaravandlapalli Village, Kadiri Rural Mandal, Sri Sathya Sai District, by following due process of law distribution at Sunnapugutta c. Set aside the Show Cause Notice in Rc.No.F/269/2025, dated 27.05.2025 (served on 02.06.2025) issued by the respondent No.3 and pass IA 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 IA 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 may be pleased Counsel for the Petitioner: 1. B.ABHAY SIDDHANTH MOOTHA Counsel for the Respondent(S): 1. GP FOR CIVIL SUPPLIES The Court made the following: 3 VS,J W.P.No.14360 of 2025 ORDER: This writ petition is filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India seeking the following relief: “….to issue an appropriate writ order or direction more particularly one in the nature of Writ of Mandamus declaring the action on part of the respondents No.3 to 6 in locking (seizing) the Fair Price Shop No.1244065 in Sunnapugutta Thanda, H/o Kummaravandlapalli Village, Kadiri Rural Mandal, Sri Sathya Sai District and also seizing E-Pos Machine allotted to the petitioner on 12.06.2025 through the Panchanama dated 12.06.2025 by not renewing the authorization for the Fair Price Shop No.1244065 in Sunnapugutta Thanda on the application No.FPSR2505074445167 made on 07.05.2025 and consequential action of not supplying the essential commodities to the petitioner for public distribution without any reason whatsoever since 02.06.2025 and issuing a second Show Cause Notice in Rc.No.F/269/2025, dated 27.05.2025 served on (02.06.2025), having issued a Show Cause Notice, dated 15.05.2025 on the same charge as arbitrary, illegal colourable exercise of power apart from being violative of the fundamental rights guaranteed to the petitioner under Articles 14, 19 and 21 of the Constitution of India, and consequently direct the respondents to consider the application, dated 07.05.2025 in FPSR2505074445167 for renewal of the authorization of the Fair Price Shop No.1244065 in Sunnapugutta Thanda, H/o Kummaravandlapalli Village, Kadiri Rural Mandal, Sri Sathya Sai District and renew the same till 31.03.2026; (b) to permit the petitioner to supply the essential commodities for public authorization of the Fair Price Shop No.1244065 in Sunnapugutta Thanda H/o Kummaravandlapalli Village, Kadiri Rural Mandal, Sri Sathya Sai District, by following due process of law distribution at Sunnapugutta and (c) Set aside the Show Cause Notice in Rc.No.F/269/2025, dated 27.05.2025 (served on 02.06.2025) issued by the respondent No.3 …” 2. The case of the petitioner, in brief, is as follows: a) The petitioner was appointed as the Fair Price Shop dealer of Shop No.1244065, Sunnapugutta Thanda, H/o Kummaravandlapalli Village, Kadiri Rural Mandal, Sri Sathya Sai District, vide proceedings dated 19.02.2015. Since then, she has been distributing the essential commodities to the cardholders without any complaints either from the cardholders or the 4 VS,J W.P.No.14360 of 2025 concerned authorities. The said authorization was in subsistence till 31.03.2025. Thereafter, the petitioner applied for renewal on 06.05.2025 by paying prescribed fee, and the said application is pending approval by respondent No.4. b) While the matter being so, on 09.05.2025 at about 11.00 a.m., respondents No.5 and 6 visited the petitioner’s fair price shop and did not found any variation in the stock, but directed the petitioner to produce the renewed authorization. To which, the petitioner informed them that she had applied for renewal on 07.05.2025 and the same is still pending. c) Surprisingly, on 15.05.2025, respondent No.3 issued a show-cause notice, framing one charge and directing the petitioner to submit a reply before 24.05.2025. In response, the petitioner submitted her explanation on 20.05.2025, denying the charge. Without considering the same, the 3rd respondent again issued another show-cause notice dated 27.05.2025 with the same allegations as mentioned in the first show-cause notice. The petitioner again submitted her explanation on 02.06.2025. Pending consideration of the same, the 4th respondent along with staff, have again inspected the petitioner’s fair price shop and taken away the E-pos machine belonging to the petitioner. It is the specific case of the petitioner that she has also filed an application seeking renewal of her authorization on 07.05.2025 and the same is pending consideration. Without passing orders on the same, repeated show-cause notices were issued to her. 5 VS,J W.P.No.14360 of 2025 d) The grievance of the petitioner is that, without there being any order of suspension or cancellation of her dealership, the respondent authorities are not releasing the essential commodities to her shop. Hence, the present writ petition is filed. 3. When the matter came up for admission on 23.06.2025, this Court passed the following interim order: “…. the 3rd respondent is directed to supply the essential commodities to the petitioner’s fair price shop so as to distribute the same to the cardholders. It is needless to mention that the 3rd respondent may proceed with the enquiry in accordance with law.” 4. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned Assistant Government Pleader for Civil Supplies appearing for the respondents. 5. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the respondents without following the due procedure, stopped supply of essential commodities to the petitioner. 6. On the other hand, learned Assistant Government Pleader for Civil Supplies supported the action of the respondents in all aspects, but, no order terminating the dealership or suspending or cancelling the authorization is placed on record to deny supply of essential commodities. 7. On perusal of the entire material available on record, it is evident that the respondent authorities without passing any order of suspension or cancellation of the petitioner’s authorization stopped supply of essential 6 VS,J W.P.No.14360 of 2025 commodities to the petitioner and have also seized the E-pos machine from the petitioner’s Fair Price Shop. 8. In this regard, it is pertinent to refer to the judgment of the Full Bench of this Court in Oleti Tirupathamma v. District Supply Officer (City), Visakhapatnam and others1, wherein it was categorically held as follows: “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. 9. In the present case on hand, the respondents ought to have considered the explanation submitted by the petitioner by affording an opportunity of 1 2002 (1) ALD 577 7 VS,J W.P.No.14360 of 2025 hearing and initiate disciplinary proceedings, if any, in accordance with law. Without any such action, the respondents cannot stop supply of essential commodities to the petitioner and also seized the ePOS machine of the petitioner’s Fair Price Shop, which is illegal and arbitrary in view of law laid down in the aforesaid Judgment. 10. In the light of the aforesaid facts and circumstances of the case, the respondents are hereby directed to supply the essential commodities to the petitioner’s Fair Price Shop, pending finalization of the disciplinary proceedings and also hand over the E-pos machine to the petitioner as expeditiously as possible, preferably within a period of one week from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. 11. With the above directions, the Writ Petition is disposed of. There shall be no order as to costs. As a sequel, miscellaneous applications, pending, if any, shall also stand closed. _____________________ JUSTICE V.SUJATHA Date : 01.09.2025. KGR