APHC010453602025 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH TUESDAY, TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE THE HONOURABLE SMT JUSTICE V.SUJATHA WRIT PETITION NO: 23830/2025 Between: 1. K S SWATHI, D/O SUDHAKAR REDDY, AGE 32 YEARS, OCC PERMANENT FP SHOP DEALER, SHOP NO. 1257053, R/O KOTIPI VILLAGE, HINDUPUR RURAL MANDAL, SRI SATHYA SAI DISTRICT . 1. THE STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH, REP BY THE PRINCIPAL SECRETARY, DEPARTMENT OF CIVIL SUPPLIES, SECRETARIAT, VELAGAPUDI, GUNTUR DISTRICT 2. THE JOINT COLLECTOR/ADDITIONAL DISTRICT MAGISTRATE, SRI SATHYA SAI DISTRICT 3. THE REVENUE DIVISIONAL OFFICER/SUB COLLECTOR, PENUKONDA, SRI SATHYA SAI DISTRICT 4. THE TAHSILDHAR, HINDUPUR RURAL MANDAL, SRI SATHYA SAI DISTRICT 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 Writs, order or Direction declaring the Proceedings Rc.No.2761/2025/C dt.31.07.2025 issued by the 3 Respondent herein there by suspending Petitioners permanent authorization pending discipli IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) TUESDAY, THE NINTH DAY OF SEPTEMBER TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SMT JUSTICE V.SUJATHA WRIT PETITION NO: 23830/2025 K S SWATHI, D/O SUDHAKAR REDDY, AGE 32 YEARS, OCC PERMANENT FP SHOP DEALER, SHOP NO. 1257053, R/O KOTIPI VILLAGE, HINDUPUR RURAL MANDAL, SRI SATHYA SAI DISTRICT ...PETITIONER AND THE STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH, REP BY THE PRINCIPAL SECRETARY, DEPARTMENT OF CIVIL SUPPLIES, SECRETARIAT, VELAGAPUDI, GUNTUR DISTRICT THE JOINT COLLECTOR/ADDITIONAL DISTRICT MAGISTRATE, SRI SATHYA SAI DISTRICT THE REVENUE DIVISIONAL OFFICER/SUB COLLECTOR, PENUKONDA, SRI SATHYA SAI DISTRICT THE TAHSILDHAR, HINDUPUR RURAL MANDAL, SRI SATHYA SAI ...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 to issue a WRIT OF MANDAMUS or any other appropriate Writ or Writs, order or Direction declaring the Proceedings Rc.No.2761/2025/C dt.31.07.2025 issued by the 3 Respondent herein there by suspending Petitioners permanent authorization pending discipli IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH [3333] THE NINTH DAY OF SEPTEMBER THE HONOURABLE SMT JUSTICE V.SUJATHA K S SWATHI, D/O SUDHAKAR REDDY, AGE 32 YEARS, OCC PERMANENT FP SHOP DEALER, SHOP NO. 1257053, R/O KOTIPI VILLAGE, HINDUPUR RURAL MANDAL, SRI SATHYA SAI DISTRICT ...PETITIONER THE STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH, REP BY THE PRINCIPAL SECRETARY, DEPARTMENT OF CIVIL SUPPLIES, SECRETARIAT, THE JOINT COLLECTOR/ADDITIONAL DISTRICT MAGISTRATE, SRI THE REVENUE DIVISIONAL OFFICER/SUB COLLECTOR, THE TAHSILDHAR, HINDUPUR RURAL MANDAL, SRI SATHYA SAI ...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 to issue a WRIT OF MANDAMUS or any other appropriate Writ or Writs, order or Direction declaring the Proceedings Rc.No.2761/2025/C dt.31.07.2025 issued by the 3 Respondent herein there by suspending Petitioners permanent authorization pending disciplinary 2 proceedings initiated against Petitioner with respect to Permanent Fair Price Authorization for Shop No. 1257053, Kotipi Village, Hindupur Rural Mandal, Sri Sathya Sai District as illegal arbitrary, against principles of natural justice and set aside the same and consequently direct the Respondent 2 to 4 to supply the Commodities to Petitioner for distributing same to Card Holders of Shop No. 1257053, during subsistence of his Permanent Fair Price Authorization for Shop No. 1257053, Kotipi Village, Hindupur Rural Mandal, Sri Sathya Sai District during pendency of disciplinary proceedings before 3rd Respondent 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 pleased to suspend the operation of Proceedings:Rc.No.2761/2025/C dt.31.07.2025 issued by the 3rd Respondent herein there by directing the Respondent 2 to 4 to supply the Commodities to Petitioner for distributing same to Card Holders of Shop No. 1257053, Kotipi Village, Hindupur Rural Mandal, Sri Sathya Sai District and pass Counsel for the Petitioner: 1. N CHANDRA SEKHAR REDDY Counsel for the Respondent(S): 1. GP FOR CIVIL SUPPLIES 3 The Court made the following Order: The present Writ Petition is 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 Writs, order or Direction declaring the Proceedings Rc.No.2761/2025/C dt: 31.07.2025 issued by the 3rd Respondent herein there by suspending Petitioner’s permanent authorization pending disciplinary proceedings initiated against Petitioner with respect to Permanent Fair Price Authorization for Shop No.1257053, Kotipi Village, Hindupur Rural Mandal, Sri Sathya Sai District, as illegal, arbitrary, against principles of natural justice and set aside the same and consequently direct the Respondent 2 to 4 to supply the Commodities to Petitioner for distributing same to Card Holders of Shop No.1257053 during subsistence of his Permanent Fair Price Authorization for Shop No.1257053, Kotipi Village, Hindupur Rural Mandal, Sri Sathya Sai District during pendency of disciplinary proceedings before 3rd Respondent and to pass such other order or orders ….” 2. The petitioner was appointed as a permanent fair price shop dealer for shop No.1257053, Kotipi Village, Hindupur Rural Mandal, Sri Satya Sai District, in the year 2015. The petitioner’s authorization has been extended from time to time and the petitioner has been distributing the essential commodities to the card holders without there being any complaint from any corner. 3. While the matter being so, due to change in political scenario, the 3rd respondent, basing on a report submitted by the Tahsildar, Hindupur Rural Mandal dated 29.07.2025 has issued suspension-cum-show cause notice dated 31.07.2025, calling for an explanation from the petitioner for initiation of disciplinary action as against her on the allegation that the petitioner is residing at Bangalore for the last three (3) years, after getting married and also on the ground that the essential commodities are being distributed at 4 places other than authorized places at higher prices. Thereafter, the petitioner has submitted her explanation on 11.08.2025 and also submitted written statement on 12.08.2025, contending that she has not violated the clause of Andhra Pradesh State Targeted Public Distribution System Control (Order), 2018 and also that the officials have initiated disciplinary proceedings as against her at the behest of some persons, who are having political influence and also are making efforts to see that the petitioner’s authorization is cancelled. 4. The grievance of the petitioner in the present case is that, even without issuing a show cause notice, calling for an explanation, the respondents have issued suspension-cum-show cause notice to the petitioner on the same day, i.e., on 31.07.2025, which seems that the respondents were pre-determined to suspend the petitioner’s authorization. 5. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned Assistant Government Pleader for Civil Supplies representing the respondents. 6. In view of the fact that even without calling for explanation from the petitioner by way of issuance of show cause notice, the petitioner’s authorization was suspended basing on the report of the Tahsildar dated 29.07.2025, this Court is of the opinion that, instead of keeping the writ petition pending the said suspension-cum-show notice dated 31.07.2025 can be treated as show cause notice only. As the petitioner has already submitted her explanation on 11.08.2025 to the said show cause notice, the 3rd respondent is directed to consider the same and pass appropriate orders in 5 accordance with law within a period of four (4) weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. 7. Accordingly, the Writ Petition is disposed of. It is needless to state that the respondents are directed to supply the essential commodities to the petitioner, as no disciplinary proceedings have been finalized against the petitioner. There shall be no order as to costs. As a sequel, Interlocutory Applications pending, if any, shall stand closed. __________________ JUSTICE V.SUJATHA Dated: 09.09.2025 MDP