Research › Search › Judgment

High Court of Andhra Pradesh · body

2025 DAILYLAW 25738 (AP)

SK RUKSHANA v. THE STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH

WP/18573/2025 · 2025-07-23

T C D Sekhar

body2025

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

APHC010363832025 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) [3505] THURSDAY,THE TWENTY FOURTH DAY OF JULY TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE T.C.D.SEKHAR WRIT PETITION NO: 18573/2025 Between: 1. SK RUKSHANA, W/O.EMUSA, AGED 30 YEARS, F.P. SHOP DEALER, SHOP NO 0856009, SINGARAYKONDA VILLAGE AND MANDAL, PRAKASAM DISTRICT ...PETITIONER AND 1. THE STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH, REP. BY ITS PRINCIPAL SECRETARY, CIVIL SUPPLIES, SECRETARIAT AT VELAGAPUDI, AMARAVATHI, GUNTUR DISTRICT 2. THE COLLECTOR AND DISTRICT MAGISTRATE, PRAKASAM DISTRICT, NELLORE 3. THE COLLECTORCS, PRAKASAM DISTRICT, 4. THE R D O, ONGOLE, PRAKASAM DISTRICT 5. THE CIVIL SUPPLIES DEPUTY TAHSILDAR, SINGARAYAKONDA 6. THE TAHSILDAR, SINGARAYAKONDA MANDAL, PRAKASAM 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 tomay be pleased to issue an appropriate order, direction or Writ more particularly one in the nature of the Writ of 2 Mandamus, to declaring the in action of 4th respondent-R.D.O., Ongole, who has not conclude disciplinary proceedings even though 90 days is completed, is wholly illegal, arbitrary and opposed to the spirit of Judgments of this Honble High Court in Joint Collector, Kurnool Vs. A.Neelima (Division Bench), 1996 Law Suit (AP) 956 and also against the Judgments of this Honble Court in W.P. No.16214/2025, dt.7-7- 2025 (Moka Venkateswara Rao Vs. State of A.P.) and also against the Judgment of this Honble Court in W.P. No 15687/2025, dt.2-7-2025 (T.Swami Vs. State of A.P.) and also against the mandatory provision of Cl.8(4)(2) of A.P. State Targeted Public Distribution System (Control) Order, 2018 and also violate of principals of natural justice and without jurisdiction and directed the respondents to restore the authorization of petitioner and consequently to direct the respondents to continue the petitioner as FP Shop dealer. Shop F.P. Shop No 0856009, Singaryakonda Village and Mandal, Prakasam District, and pass such 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 may be pleased to direct the R.D.O., Ongole, Prakasam District 4th Respondent to allot Essential Commodities to the petitioner's F.P. Shop, Shop No:0856009, Singarayakonda Village, Prakasam District, pending disposal of the above Writ Petition and pass such Counsel for the Petitioner: 1. Alapati Vivekananda Counsel for the Respondent(S): 1. GP FOR CIVIL SUPPLIES 3 The Court made the following order: When the matter is taken up for hearing, learned counsel for the petitioner seeks permission of this court to withdraw the present writ petition, on the ground that the petitioner has already filed an appeal against the impugned order. 2. The said request of the petitioner accepted. 3. Accordingly, the writ petition is dismissed as withdrawn. There shall be no order as to costs. As a sequel, pending applications, if any, shall stand closed. _____________________ JUSTICE T.C.D. SEKHAR Dt.24.07.2025 DSB 4 23 THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE T.C.D. SEKHAR WP No.18573 of 2025 Date 24.07.2025 U DSB