APHC010323662021 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) MONDAY,THE EIGHTEENTH DAY OF AUGUST TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SMT JUSTICE V.SUJATHA ^ WRIT PETITION NO: 19422 OF 2021 Between; Sri Vijaya Lakshmi Dwacra Mahila Sangam, Rep. by its President Smt. Pilla Sridevi, W/o P. Appala Naidu, Aged about 35 years, Occ Fair Price Shop Dealer (under suspension), R/o. Chinthalapeta Village,Gurla Mandal, Vizianagaram District. ...PETITIONER AND 1. The State of Andhra Pradesh, Civil Supplies Department, Secretariat Building, Velagapudi, Guntur District, A.P. Rep. by its Secretary. 2. The District Collector(Civil Supplies), Vizianagaram, Vizianagaram District. 3. The Joint Collector, Vizianagaram, Vizianagaram District. 4. The Revenue Divisional Officer, Vizianagaram Sub-division, Vizianagaram District. 5. The Mandal Civil Supplies Officer(MCSO), Nellimarla, Vizianagaram District 6. The Tahsildar, Gurla Mandal, Vizianagaram District. ...RESPONDENTS 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 of mandamus or any other appropriate writ or direction declaring the proceedings of the 4*^ respondent passed in Rc No. 1106/2021- B dated 26.08.2021 as illegal, arbitrary, without assigning any reasons and non application of mind and set aside the same and consequently direct the respondents to release the Essential Commodities to the petitioner for the F.P Shop No.0221032 of Chinthalapeta village of Gurla Mandal, Vizianagaram District. lA NO: 1 OF 2021 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 direct the respondent to release the Essential Commodities to the petitioner for the F.P Shop No.0221032 of Chinthalapeta Village of Gurla Mandal, Vizianagaram District, for distribution to the Cardholders, by suspending the proceedings passed by the 4'^ respondent vide Rc No. 1106/2021-B dated 26.08.2021, pending disposal of the Writ Petition. lA NO: 1 OF 2023 Between: 1. The State of Andhra Pradesh, Civil Supplies Department, Secretariat Building, Velagapudi, Guntur District, A.P. Rep. by its Secretary. 2. The District Collector(Civil Supplies), Vizianagaram, Vizianagaram District. 3. The Joint Collector, Vizianagaram, Vizianagaram District. 4. The Revenue Divisional Officer, Vizianagaram Sub-division Vizianagaram District. 5. The Mandal Civil Supplies Officer(MCSO), Nellimarla, Vizianagaram District 6. The Tahsildar, Gurla Mandal, Vizianagaram District. ...PETITIONERS/RESPONDENTS AND Sri Vijaya Lakshmi Dwacra Mahila Sangam, Rep. by its President Smt. Pilla Sridevi, W/o P. Appala Naidu, Aged about 35 years, Occ Fair Price Shop Dealer (under suspension), R/o. Chinthalapeta Village,Gurla Mandal, Vizianagaram District. ...RESPONDENT/PETITIONER 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 vacate the interim order dated 06.09.2021 passed in W.P.No. 19422 of 2021. Counsel for the Petitioner: SRI TADDI NAGESWARA RAO Counsel for the Respondent Nos.1 to 6: GP FOR CIVIL SUPPLIES The Court made the following order: r APHC010323662021 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) [3333] MONDAY, THE EIGHTEENTH DAY OF AUGUST TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SMT JUSTICE V.SUJATHA WRIT PETITION NO: 19422/2021 Between: 1.SRI VIJAYA LAKSHMI DWACRA MAHILA SANGAM, REP.BY ITS PRESIDENT SMT. PILLA SRIDEVI, W/0 P. APPALA NAIDU, AGED ABOUT 35 YEARS, OCC FAIR PRICE SHOP DEALER (UNDER SUSPENSION). R/0. CHINTHALAPETA VILLAGE,GURLA MANDAL, VIZIANAGARAM DISTRICT. ...PETITIONER AND 1.THE STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH CIVIL SUPPLIES DEPARTMENT, SECRETARIAT BUILDING, VELAGAPUDI, GUNTUR DISTRICT, A.P. REP. BY ITS SECRETARY. 2.THE DISTRICT COLLECTOR CIVIL SUPPLIES, , VIZIANAGARAM VIZIANAGARAM DISTRICT. 3.THE JOINT COLLECTOR, , VIZIANAGARAM, VIZIANAGARAM DISTRICT. 4.THE REVENUE DIVISIONAL OFFICER, VIZIANAGARAM SUB DIVISION,VIZIANAGARAMDISTRICT. 5.THE MANDAL CIVIL SUPPLIES OFFICER MCSO. , NELLIMARLA, VIZIANAGARAM DISTRICT 6.THE TAHSILDAR, GURLA MANDAL, VIZIANAGARAM DISTRICT. ...RESPONDENT(S): 2 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 a writ of mandamus or any other appropriate writ or direction declaring the proceedings of the 4th respondent passed in Rc No. 1106/2021-B dated 26.08.2021 as illegal, arbitrary, without assigning any reasons and non application of mind and set aside the same and consequently direct the respondents to release the Essential Commodities to the petitioner for the F.P Shop No.0221032 of Chinthalapeta village of Curia Mandal, Vizianagaram District, pass such lA NO: 1 OF 2021 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 be pleased to direct the 4th respondent to release the Essential Commodities to the petitioner for the F.P Shop No.0221032 of Chinthalapeta Village of Curia Mandal, Vizianagaram District, for distribution to the Cardholders, by suspending the proceedings passed by the 4th respondent vide Rc No. 1106/2021-B dated 26.08.2021, pending disposal ofthe WP. lA NO: 1 OF 2023 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 pleased to vacate the interim order dated 06.09.2021 passed in W.P.No.19422 of 2021 and pass Counsel for the Petitioner: 1.TADDI NACESWARA RAO Counsel for the Respondent(S): 1.GP FOR CIVIL SUPPLIES The Court made the following: 3 HONOURABLE SMT. JUSTICE V.SUJATHA WRIT PETITION No.19422 of 2021 ORDER: The present Writ Petition was filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India seeking the following relief:- to issue a writ of mandamus or any. other appropriate writ or direction declaring the proceedings of the 4‘^ respondent passed in Rc. No. 1106/2021-B dated 26.08.2021 as illegal, arbitrary, without assigning any reasons and non application of mind and set aside the same and consequently direct the respondents to release the Essential Commodities to the petitioner for the F.P Shop No. 0221032 of Chinthalapeta vitlage of Gurla Mandal, Vizianagaram District and to pass such other order or orders The petitioner is a Dwacra Mahila Sangam. The petitioner group was appointed as temporary fair price shop dealer of Chinthalapeta Village vide proceedings dated 19.05.2018 by the respondent and the same was 2. extended from time to time. 3. While the matter being so, basing on the complaint submitted by the villagers of Chinthalapeta Village, the 4“^ respondent submitted a report to the 2"'^ respondent and basing on the said report, the 2"'^ respondent removed the petitioner-group and appointed Lakshmi Parvathi Parameswara Group to distribute the essential commodities to the card holders vide proceedings dated 07.08.2019. 4. Challenging which, the petitioner was constrained to file writ petition No.17994 of 2019 before this Court and, after hearing both sides, on 16.12.2019 this Court was pleased to allow the said writ petition by setting 4 aside the impugned proceedings dated 07.08.2019, declaring the said proceedings as illegal. Consequent to the orders passed by this Court, the petitioner was directed to continue as fair price shop dealer and accordingly essential commodities were released in favour of the petitioner. Thereafter, once again due to political pressure, the respondents have inspected the petitioner’s shop on 15.02.2020. On verification of the physical stock with the closing balance, as per the records i.e. E-Pos stock report, found minor variations in respect of PDS rice (-7.0121), Midday Meals (-0.650), Sugar (-0.750) and red gram dal (+16.00). For which, the petitioner gave an explanation stating that excess stock of 16 kgs of red gram dal has occurred due to non-delivery of stock to some of the card holders, in spite of obtaining biometrics. Basing on the said allegation, the Revenue Divisional Officer, i.e., the 4**^ respondent herein has passed impugned orders dated 29.02.2020, suspending the petitioner’s authorization, pending enquiry. 5. 6. Challenging which, the petitioner was constrained to file writ petition No'.7039 of 2020, wherein, on 11.05.2020, this Court was pleased to grant interim suspension of the impugned order passed by the 4^*^ respondent herein dated 29.02.2020 and further directed the respondents to release the stocks to the petitioner for distribution to the card holders. In pursuance of the interim order passed by this Court, the respondents released the stocks to the petitioner and petitioner was distributing the essential commodities to the card holders without any complaints. 5 r While the matter being, so, again the Assistant Supplies Officer, Vizianagaram Division and CSDT, Nellimarla have visited the petitioner’s fair shop at about 11:30 A.M. on 23.10.2020, when the petitioner went to her mother’s village at Srikakulam, as her mother was un-well. When the petitioner reached her mother’s village, she received a phone call at 2:00 P.M., stating that the inspection officials have visited the shop and also asked the petitioner to come back. Then, the petitioner informed the officials that she will reach the shop by late evening. Again, on 24.10.2020, the ASO and CSDT officials have visited petitioner’s shop at 10:30 A.M., and verified the stocks and found minor variations, which are within the permissible limits under the Act. Except the closure of the shop at the time of visit, no other irregularities were found. But, in spite of the same, the 4*^ respondent has passed the impugned order dated 02.11.2020, keeping the petitioner’s authorization under interim suspension. 7. 8. Challenging which, the petitioner was constrained to file writ petition No.20661 of 2020 before this Court. On 06.11.2020, this Court was pleased to grant interim direction to release the stocks to the petitioner for a period of four (4) weeks and the interim order was extended from time to time. As the said interim order was not complied with by the respondents, the petitioner herein filed a contempt case against the respondents in C.C.No.1403 of 2020 before this Court. The respondents, after getting to know about the filing -of the contempt case, issued release orders with an anti-date of 06.12.2020 to the petitioner and the same was served on the petitioner on 08.12.2020, but 6 anyhow stocks were not supplied to the petitioner for the month of December 2020 and the petitioner was allowed to distribute the essential commodities from the month of January, 2021, even though the interim order was granted on 06.11.2020. Accordingly, the writ petition No.20661 of 2020 was allowed by this Court on 24.03.2021 by setting aside the impugned order dated 02.11.2020 passed by the 4*'" respondent herein and further directed the respondents to release the essential commodities to the petitioner, till passing of the final orders in the proceedings initiated under Section 6-A of Essential Commodities Act or any other disciplinary proceedings and the contempt case was also closed on 07.07.2021, as the interim order granted in writ petition No.20661 of 2020 was complied with. While the matter stood thus, once again on 21.08.2021, the Mandal 9. Revenue Inspector, Gurla, along with the Inspector of Police, Vigilance and Enforcement Department, Srikakulam and Village Revenue Officer of Chinthalapeta Village have visited the petitipner’s fair price shop at 10:30 A.M. and found minor variations in Sugar (-3) packets (each 500 gms i.e. 1.5 Kgs) and PMGKY Rice (-184 Kgs), which are within the permissible limits. The inspecting officials have seized the stock and submitted a report to the 4'^ respondent. Basing on the said report, the 4'^ respondent has passed the impugned order dated 26.08.2021 vide Rc.No.1106/2021-B, keeping the petitioner’s authorization under interim suspension, until further orders. Challenging which, the present writ petition was filed by the petitioner. 7 10. When the writ petition came up for admission, on 06.09.2021, this Court was pleased to pass the following interim order; "Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner was appointed as a temporary fair price shop dealer in the year 2018. Since then, she has been distributing the essential commodities to the cardholders without any complaint. Earlier on three occasions when the petitioner’s authorization was suspended alleging certain variations, and was not supplied the commodities to distribute the same to the cardholders, she approached this Court by filing W.P.No.17994 of 2019, W.P.No.7039 of 2020 and W.P.No.20661 of 2020. Pursuant to the directions of this Court in the said writ petitions, the petitioner’s dealership was restored. Again, 21.08.2021 the Mandal Revenue Inspector, Curia inspected the petitioner’s fair price shop and alleging minor variations in sugar and PMGKY. rice, which are within permissible limits as per clause 29(a) of the APSTPDS(Control) Order, 2018, seized the stock and submitted a report to the 4^^ respondent. The 4^'i respondent passed the impugned order dated 26.08.2021 suspending the petitioner’s authorization pending enquiry, without there being any separate report submitted to take disciplinary action, which is illegal, arbitrary and contrary to the provision of clause 20(i) of the APSTPDS(Control) order, 2018. In support of his contentions, he relied on the decision of this Court dated 08.01.2020 in W.P.No.500 of 2020. He would further submit that at the instance of the political party, the petitioner’s authorization is being suspended time and again. Learned Assistant Government Pleader for Civil Supplies, having drawn the attention of this Court to the provision of clause 29(a) of the Control Order, 2018, stoutly opposed for grant of interim order stating that minor variation in respect of single 8 commodity upto 1.5% may be allowed taking into consideration of transactions of one month i.e., only with regard to the sales done but not the entire supply to the dealer. He would further submit that against the impugned order, appeal lies to the Collector (CS) but the petitioner without filing appeal approached this Court. Learned AQP failed to show this Court any guidelines or circular Instructions as to how the variations have to be calculated. Having regard to the facts and circumstances of the case, submissions of the learned counsel and on perusal of the material record, this Court found that the impugned suspension order is passed without there being an independent report submitted by the Mandal Revenue Inspector to take disciplinary action against the petitioner as required under the provision of clause 20(i) of the Control Order, 2018. This Court is prime facie satisfied that the petitioner has shown sufficient cause for grant of interim order. Accordingly, while suspending the impugned suspension order, there shall be interim direction as prayed for. ” 11. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned Assistant Government Pleader for Civil Supplies representing the respondents. The 4'^^ respondent herein filed a counter affidavit, duly enclosing vacate stay, reiterating the facts as stated by the petitioner and stated that 12. during the inspection conducted by the Regional Vigilance and Enforcement Officer, Srikakulam along with the Mandal Revenue Inspector, Gurla, on 21.08.2021, have noticed that there are variations of rice (-184 Kgs) and sugar (-3 packets), on physical verification of stock, as per 9 e-Pos stock report. Basing on the report of the Mandal Revenue Inspector, the Tahsildar, Gurla has filed a case under Section 6-A of the Essential Commodities Act, 1955. Basing on the recommendation of the Tahsildar, Gurla, the petitioner’s dealership was suspended, pending enquiry vide the orders of the Revenue Divisional Officer, Vizianagaram, i.e., the 4'*^ respondent herein dated 26.08.2021. 13. It is further stated that, under Clause 12(p)(3) of the Andhra Pradesh Targeted Public Distribution System (Control) Order, 2018, it has been stipulated that the fair price shop dealer shall make available scheduled commodities physically, as per the balances shown in the electronic point of sale generated prints to cross check the variation (excess/deficit) in stocks. As the petitioner violated the provisions of the Andhra Pradesh Targeted Public Distribution System (Control) Order, 2018, the petitioner was placed under suspension. On perusal of the impugned proceedings of the 4'^ respondent dated 26.08.2021, it can be seen that, even without calling for written explanation from the petitioner, only basing on the oral explanation given by the petitioner during the course of inspection that the variation was occurred due to non showing of the stock online while delivering goods to the cardholders, due to server failure, the 4*^ respondent has issued the impugned proceedings dated 26.08.2021, suspending the authorization of the petitioner, which is against 14. 10 the principles of natural justice. In K. Prabhavathi v. State of A.P., represented by its Principal Secretary and others\ it was observed as under; “11. Since the appointing authority acts as a quasi judicial authority, he must give coaent reasons specifying the need for placing the dealer under suspension pending disciplinary enquiry. The mere cryptic order that the report of the inspecting authority reveals a prima-facie case against the petitioner of his committing certain irregularities and thereby violating the Control Order, 2018 is not sufficient to justify suspension. The suspension order shall not lust signify the subjective satisfaction of the Officer but it should demonstrate compulsive need for suspension. It should be noted that not all follies of a dealer, invariably require his suspension pending enquiry. Therefore, appointing authority must carefully differentiate between the prima-facie case for holding disciplinary enquiry and a compulsory case which requires not only disciplinary enquiry but also suspension pending enquiry.” Even this Court, in K. Sumathi Vs. State of Andhra Pradesh^, under similar circumstances has categorically held that the reasons for coming to 15. 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. Once the petitioner submits an explanation pursuant to a show cause 16. notice, the concerned authorities must evaluate it thoroughly and shall issue a reasoned order to justify their actions. Without doing so, the 4 respondent has issued the impugned proceedings suspending the authorization of the petitioner, as such, the same has to be set-aside. 1 2020 see Online AP 755 2 2016 (3) ALT 10 (S.B.) 11 17. Accordingly, the Writ Petition is allowed by setting aside the impugned order issued by the 4*'' respondent dated 26.08.2021. It is needless to say that the respondents are at liberty to initiate action against the petitioner, if at all, they find any variation in future. There shall be no order as to costs. As a sequel. Interlocutory Applications pending, if any, shall stand closed. Sd/-B.PRASADA RAO ASSISTANT REGISTRAR //TRUE COPY// SECTION OFFICER To 1. The Secretary, Civil Supplies Department, State of Andhra Pradesh Secretariat Building, Velagapudi, Guntur District, A.P. 2. The District Coilector(Civil Supplies), Vizianagaram, Vizianagaram District. 3. The Joint Collector, Vizianagaram, Vizianagaram District. 4. The Revenue Divisional Officer, Vizianagaram Vizianagaram District. 5. The Mandal Civil Supplies Officer(MCSO), Nellimarla, Vizianagaram District 6. The Tahsildar, Gurla Mandal, Vizianagaram District. 7. One CC to Sri Taddi Nageswara Rao, Advocate [OPUC] 8. Two CCs to GP for Civil Supplies, High Court of Andhra Pradesh [OUT] 9. Two CD Copies. Sub-division, ssb HIGH COURT DATED:18/08/2025 ORDER WP No. 19422 OF 2021 ALLOWING THE W.P. WITHOUT COSTS