APHC010433192025 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) [3333] TUESDAY, THE SECOND DAY OF SEPTEMBER TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SMT JUSTICE V.SUJATHA WRIT PETITION NO: 23062/2025 Between: 1. TANNERU RUPASRI, W/O. ANAHANEYULU, AGED ABOUT 34 YEARS, DEALER OF F.P. SHOP NO.0817031 R/O. KOPPERAPADU VILLAGE, BALLIKURAVA MANDAL BAPATLA DISTRICT. ...PETITIONER AND 1. THE STATE OF AP, REP. BY ITS PRINCIPAL SECRETARY, CONSUMER AFFAIRS FOOD AND CIVIL SUPPLIES, SECRETARIAT BUILDINGS, VELAGAPUDI VILLAGE TULLUR MANDAL, GUNTUR DISTRICT. 2. THE COLLECTOR CIVIL SUPPLIES, BAPATLA, BAPATLA DISTRICT. 3. THE REVENUE DIVISIONAL OFFICER, CHIRALA, BAPATLA DISTRICT. 4. THE CIVIL SUPPLIES REVENUE INSPECTOR, PARCHUR, BAPATLA 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 order, direction or writ, more particularly one in the nature of writ of Mandamus, declaring the action of Respondent No.3, in not concluding the disciplinary proceedings initiated through Show Cause Notice vide Rc.H/521/2025, dated 01.04.2025, and not supplying the Essential 2 Commodities to the petitioner in respect of F.P. Shop No.0817031 of Kopperapadu Village, Ballikurava Mandal, Bapatia District without suspending, as illegal, arbitrary, contrary to clause 8(4) of the A.P State Targeted Public Distribution System (control 0 order, 2018, and in violation of Article 14, 19 and 21 of the Constitution of India and consequently direct the respondent No.3, to conclude the disciplinary proceedings initiated through Show Cause Notice vide Rc.H/521/2025, dated 01.04.2025, and to supply the essential commodities 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 Counsel for the Petitioner: 1. MADHAVA RAO NALLURI Counsel for the Respondent(S): 1. GP FOR CIVIL SUPPLIES The Court made the following: 3 ORDER: This writ petition is filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India seeking the following relief:- “….to issue an order, direction or writ, more particularly one in the nature of writ of Mandamus, declaring the action of Respondent No.3, in not concluding the disciplinary proceedings initiated through Show Cause Notice vide Rc.H/521/2025, dated 01.04.2025, and not supplying the Essential Commodities to the petitioner in respect of F.P.Shop No.0817031 of Kopperapadu Village, Ballikurava Mandal, Bapatla District, without suspending, as illegal, arbitrary, contrary to clause 8(4) of the A.P State Targeted Public Distribution System (control) order, 2018, and in violation of Article 14, 19 and 21 of the Constitution of India and consequently direct the respondent No.3, to conclude the disciplinary proceedings initiated through Show Cause Notice vide Rc.H/521/2025, dated 01.04.2025, and to supply the essential commodities, and pass any other order….” 2. The brief facts of the case are that vide proceedings in Rc.No.I/2050/2021, dated 08.12.2021, the 3rd respondent has appointed the petitioner as fair price shop dealer of shop No.0817031, Kopperapadu Village, Ballikurava Mandal, Bapatla District, on temporary basis and accordingly, the petitioner has been running the same for the past four (4) years. 3. While so, on 15.03.2025, the 4th respondent along with his staff inspected the shop and found variation in the stock. As such, the 4th respondent submitted his report to the 3rd respondent, basing on which, the 3rd respondent has initiated proceedings by issuing show cause notice vide Rc.H/521/2025, dated 01.04.2025 and directed the petitioner to submit her explanation within one week from the date of receipt of the notice and scheduled personal hearing on 11.04.2025, for 4 which the petitioner submitted her explanation. 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 nor concluding the disciplinary proceedings. Hence, the present writ petition is filed. 4. Heard Sri Madhava Rao Nalluri, learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned Assistant Government Pleader for Civil Supplies for the respondents. 5. Learned counsel for the petitioner while reiterating the contentions, placed reliance on the decision of Full Bench of the erstwhile High Court of Andhra Pradesh reported in Oleti Tirupathamma v. District Supply Officer (City) Visakhapatnam and others1 in support of his contention. On the strength of the principle laid down in the above judgment, learned counsel for petitioner requested this Court to direct the respondents to conclude the disciplinary proceedings and to allow the petitioner to run her fair price shop and to supply essential commodities to the card holders. 6. Learned Assistant Government Pleader for Civil Supplies has furnished a copy of the instructions of the 3rd respondent, dated 19.08.2025, wherein it is stated that though they have issued a show cause notice to the petitioner on 01.04.2025, for which the petitioner had submitted her explanation on 15.04.2025. But however, it is an admitted fact that thereafter the disciplinary proceedings have not been finalized. 1 2002 (1) ALD 577 5 7. Earlier, a similar question came up before the Full Bench of High Court of Andhra Pradesh in Oleti Tirupathamma’s case (1 supra) wherein the Court held as follows – “Such action disabling fair price shop dealer to run the shop without any order of suspension or cancellation is illegal and arbitrary and issued such directions”. 8. In view of the law laid down by Full Bench of High Court of Andhra Pradesh in the aforesaid judgment, this Court is of the opinion that the action of the respondents is illegal and arbitrary. Therefore, the respondents are directed to supply essential commodities to the petitioner by allowing her to distribute the same to the card holders, allotted to her fair price shop, till her dealership is terminated or till passing an order under Clause 8(4) of the Control Order, 2018. 9. Accordingly, the Writ Petition is disposed of. There shall be no order as to costs. As a sequel, Interlocutory Applications pending, if any, in this Writ Petition, shall stand closed. ___________________ JUSTICE V.SUJATHA Date: 02.09.2025 SNI 6 146 THE HONOURABLE SMT JUSTICE V.SUJATHA WRIT PETITION NO: 23062 of 2025 Date: 02.09.2025 SNI