APHC010295722025 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: 14848/2025 Between: 1. KALLURI NARJIRUNNISHA, D/O CHINNA HUSSAIN SA AGE34 YEARS, OCC FP SHOP DEALER FOR SHOP NO. 1336019, YERRAGUNTIA VILLAGE SIRVEL MANDAL, NANDYAL DIST. ...PETITIONER AND 1. THE STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH, REP.BY ITS PRINCIPLE SECRETARY CIVIL SUPPLIES DEPARTMENT, SECRETARIAT, VELAGAPUDI, GUNTUR DIST. 2. THE COLLECTOR CS, NANDYAL DIST., AT NANDYAL. 3. THE REVENUE DIVISIONAL OFFICER, NANDYAL TOWN, NANDYAL DIST. 4. THE TAHSILDAR, SIRVEL MANDAL, NANDYAL DIST. ...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 a writ or direction preferably writ of mandamus declaring the order issued by the 3 respondent vide Rc.Cs.No.111/2025 dt20-4-2025 cancelling/suspending the petitioners authorization in respect of the F.P Shop No.1336019, Yerraguntia Village Sirvel Mandal, Nandyal Dist., without following the procedure as contemplated under AP State Targetted Public Distribution System (Control) Order,2018 is illegal, arbitrary, and violative of principles of natural justice and consequentially set aside the impugned order 2 VS,J W.P.No.14848 of 2025 dt20-4-2025 by directing the Respondents to continue petitioner as FP Shop dealer as usual, 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 to suspend the impugned order passed by the 3rd respondent vide Rc.Cs.No.111/2 025 dt:20-4-2025 in respect of FP Shop No.1336019, Yerraguntia Village Sirvel Mandal, Nandyal Dist., Counsel for the Petitioner: 1. M M M SRINIVASA RAO Counsel for the Respondent(S): 1. GP FOR CIVIL SUPPLIES The Court made the following: 3 VS,J W.P.No.14848 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 a writ or direction preferably writ of mandamus declaring the order issued by the 3rd respondent vide Rc.Cs.No.111/2025 date 20.04.2025 cancelling/suspending the petitioner’s authorization in respect of the F.P.Shop No.1336019, Yerraguntia Village, Sirvel Mandal, Nandyal Dist., without following the procedure as contemplated under AP State Targetted Public Distribution System (Control) Order, 2018 is illegal, arbitrary and violative of principles of natural justice and consequentially set aside the impugned order dated 20.04.2025 by directing the Respondents to continue petitioner as FP Shop dealer….” 2. The petitioner was appointed as permanent dealer for fair price shop No.1336019, Yerraguntla Village, Sirvel Mandal, Nandyal District in the year 2018. The petitioner’s authorization is valid up to 31.03.2025. The petitioner has been distributing the essential commodities to the cardholders without there being any complaint either from the cardholders or from the concerned authorities. 3. While the matter being so, on 20.12.2025 at about 1.00 a.m., the Deputy Tahsildar (CS), Sirvel along with Village Revenue Officer, Yerraguntla Village have inspected the petitioner’s shop and found certain variations and have seized the stock from the petitioner’s fair price shop and also initiated proceedings under Section 6-A of Essential Commodities Act, 1955, as against the petitioner. Thereafter, the 3rd respondent has issued a show-cause 4 VS,J W.P.No.14848 of 2025 notice on 11.01.2025 calling for an explanation from the petitioner within seven (7) days, for which, the petitioner has submitted an explanation on 29.01.2025 denying the charges framed against the petitioner. As the authorization was suspended by 3rd respondent vide proceedings dated 01.02.2025 even without considering the explanation submitted by the petitioner on 29.01.2025, the petitioner was constrained to file W.P.No.4311 of 2025 before this Court, which was allowed vide order dated 24.02.2025 as per the guidelines issued in the decision of C.Durga Srinivas Rao and others vs. State of Andhra Pradesh, rep. by its Principal Secretary (Civil Supplies)1 setting aside the suspension order dated 01.02.2025, however giving liberty to the authorities to conduct the enquiry as per law. 4. The grievance of the petitioner in this writ petition is that though the suspension order itself was suspended by this Court, by allowing the earlier writ petition filed by the petitioner, the respondents basing on the same show- cause notice dated 11.01.2025, have cancelled the petitioner’s authorization vide impugned proceedings dated 20.04.2025. It is also brought to the notice of this Court that though the subject of the impugned proceedings refers as fair price shop authorization cancellation order, but ultimately in the operative portion, it states that the petitioner’s fair price shop is kept under suspension pending enquiry and thus, there is no clarity as to whether the petitioner’s authorization has been cancelled or kept under suspension pending enquiry. 1 2015 SCC Online Hyd 680 5 VS,J W.P.No.14848 of 2025 Challenging the proceedings dated 20.04.2025, the present writ petition is filed. 5. When the matter came up for admission on 23.05.2025, this Court passed the following interim order: “….there shall be an interim suspension of impugned order vide Rc.Cs.No.111/2025, dated 20.04.2025, issued by the 3rd respondent.” 6. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned Assistant Government Pleader for Civil Supplies for respondents. 7. It is an admitted fact that in pursuance of the orders passed by this Court on 24.02.2025 in W.P.No.4311 of 2025, admittedly there was no fresh inspection or complaint made against the petitioner, warranting either cancellation of the petitioner’s authorization or suspension of the petitioner’s authorization pending enquiry. However, the 3rd respondent herein, even without looking into the order passed by this Court in W.P.No.4311 of 2025, have passed the impugned order dated 20.04.2025 basing upon the earlier show cause notice issued on 11.01.2025. It can also be observed that after disposal of the Writ Petition No.4311 of 2025 filed by the petitioner on 24.02.2025, neither there was any complaint made against the petitioner nor any inspection conducted on the petitioner’s fair price shop. As such, the question of suspending or cancelling the petitioner’s authorization does not arise. 6 VS,J W.P.No.14848 of 2025 8. In view of the same, the Writ Petition is allowed by setting aside the impugned proceeding dated 20.04.2025 issued by the 3rd respondent. The respondents are directed to supply the essential commodities to the petitioner’s fair price shop until any further variations/complaints found as against the petitioner. 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