•APHC010456362025 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) MONDAY. THE FIRST DAY OF SEPTEMBER TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SMT JUSTICE V.SUJATHA WRIT PETITION NO: 231.?7 qf 2025 U Between: Vajrala Veeranjamma, W/o Srinivasa No 0826017, Budawada Village, / about 41 years, R/o Budawada Village Andhra Pradesh. Reddy, F.P Shop Dealer vide F.P Shop aged J. Panguluru Mandal, Bapatia District J. Panguluru Mandal, Bapatia District ...Petitioner AND 1. The State of Andhra Pradesh n .. Principal Secretary, Civil Supplies Department, Secretariat, Velagapudi, Amaravati, Guntur District 2. The District Collector Civil Supplies, Bapatia District, Bapatia. 3. The Revenue Divisional Officer Chirala, Bapatia District. Mandal, Bapatia District. Janakavaram Panguluru Mandal 4. The Tahsildar, Janakavaram Panguluru 5. The Enforcemeht Deputy Tahsildar, Bapatia District. 6. The Village Revenue Panguluru Mandal Bapatia District. Officer VRO, Budavada Village, Janakavaram ...Respondents Petition under Article 220 of the Constitution of India praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed therewith pleased to issue a Writ, Order the High Court may be or Direction, the action of the i Price Shop No. 0826017 more particularly one in the nature of Writ of Mandamus, declaring stock of petitioner Fair respondents in seizing the , Budavada Village, Janakavaram Panguluru Mandal, Bapatia District, through a mediator-report dated 26.08.2025, and handing over the same to the e'” Respondent thereby preventing the petitioner from distribution of essential commodities to card holder, without issuing any show-cause notice, without affording an opportunity of hearing, and without passing any suspension or cancellation order and the said action is relying on unrelated criminal case foisted against the petitioner or 6A proceedings, is whoiiy arbitrary, iiiegal, and without jurisdiction and contrary to the provisions of the Essential 1955, violative of the principles of Commodities Act, natural justice, and infringes the fundamental rights of the petitioner guaranteed under Articles 14, 19(1)(g), and 21 of the Constitution of India, and to aiiow the Petitioner to suppiy/distribute the commodities as dealer of F.P Shop No 0826017, Budawada Village, J. Panguluru Mandal Bapatia District. lANOMOF 2025 consequently direct the Respondents to the card holders 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 mediator report dated 26.08.2025 as well as the oral suspension directions issued by the respondents, by permit the Petitioner to continue distribution of essential commodities Price Shop No. 0826017, situated at Budawada Bapatia District. to the cardholders through Fair ; Village, J. Panguluru Mandal, Counsel for the Petitioner: GAJJALA MALLIKARJUNA Counsel for the Respondents: GP FOR CIVIL SUPPLIES The Court made the following order: REDDY I ,1 APHC310456362025 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: 23137/2025 Between: 1.VAJRALA VEERANJAMMA, W/0 SRINIVASA REDDY F.P SHOP DEALER VIDE F.P SHOP NO 0826017, BUDAWADA VILLAGE, J. PANGULURU MANDAL, BAPATLA DISTRICT, AGED ABOUT 41 YEARS, R/0 BUDAWADA VILLAGE, J. PANGULURU MANDAL, BAPATLA DISTRICT, ANDHRA PRADESH. ...PETITIONER AND 1.THE STATE OF AP, REP. BY ITS PRINCIPAL SECRETARY, CIVIL SUPPLIES DEPARTMENT. SECRETARIAT, AMARAVATI, GUNTUR DISTRICT. VELAGAPUDI, 2.THE DISTRICT COLLECTOR CIVIL SUPPLIES, BAPATLA DISTRICT, BAPATLA. 3.THE REVENUE DIVISIONAL OFFICER, CHIRALA, BAPATLA DISTRICT. 4.THE TAHSILDAR, JANAKAVARAM PANGULURU MANDAL, BAPATLA DISTRICT. 5.THE ENFORCEMENT DEPUTY TAHSILDAR, JANAKAVARAM PANGULURU MANDAL, BAPATLA DISTRICT. 6.THE VILLAGE REVENUE OFFICER VRO, BUDAVADA VILLAGE, JANAKAVARAM PANGULURU MANDAL BAPATLA DISTRICT. ...RESPONDENT(S): 2 VS,J W.P.No.23137 of,2025 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, Order or Direction, more particularly one in the nature of Writ of Mandamus, declaring the action of the respondents in seizing the stock of petitioner Fair Price Shop No. 0826017, Budavada Village, Janakavaram Panguluru Mandal, Bapatia District, through a mediator report dated 26.08.2025, and handing over the same to the 6th Respondent thereby preventing the petitioner from distribution of essential commodities to card holder, without issuing any show-cause notice, without affording an opportunity of hearing, and without passing any suspension or cancellation order and the said action is relying on unrelated criminal case foisted against the petitioner or 6A proceedings, is wholly arbitrary, illegal, and without jurisdiction and contrary to the provisions of the Essential Commodities 1955, violative of the principles of natural justice, and infringes the fundamental rights of the petitioner guaranteed under Articles 14, 19(1)(g), and 21 of the Constitution of India, and consequently direct the Respondents to allow the Petitioner to supply/distribute the commodities to the card holders as dealer of F.P Shop No 0826017, Budawada Village, J. Panguluru Mandal, Bapatia District and pass lA 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 impugned mediator report dated 26.08.2025 as well as the oral suspension directions issued by the respondents, by permit the Petitioner to continue distribution of essential commodities to the cardholders through Fair Price Shop No. 0826017, situated at Budawada Village, J. Panguluru Mandal, Bapatia District, and pass Counsel for the Petitioner: 1 .GAJJALA MALLIKARJUNA REDDY Counsel for the Respondent(S): 1.GP FOR CIVIL SUPPLIES The Court made the following: Act, 3 VS,J W.P.No.23137 of2025 ORDER: This writ petition is filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India seeking the following relief; “....to issue a Writ, Order or Direction, more particularly one in the nature of Writ of Mandamus, declaring the action of the respondents in seizing the stock of petitioner Fair Price Shop No.0826017, Budavada Village, Janakavaram Panguluru Mandal, Bapatia District, through a mediator report dated 26.08.2025, and handing over the same to the 6"’ Respondent thereby preventing the petitioner from distribution of essentiai commodities to card holder, without issuing any show-cause notice, without affording an opportunity of hearing, and without passing any suspension or cancellation order and the said action is relying on unrelated criminal case foisted against the petitioner or 6A proceedings, is wholiy arbitrary, illegal and without Jurisdiction and contrary to the provisions of the Essential Commodities Act 1955, violative of the principles of natural Justice, and infringes the fundamental rights of the petitioner guaranteed under Articles 14, 19(1)(g) and 21 of the Constitution of India and consequently direct the Respondents to aiiow the Petitioner to supply/distribute the commodities to the card holders as dealer of F.P. Shop No.0826017, Budawada Village, J.Panguluru Mandal, Bapatia District...” 2. The case of the petitioner, in brief, is as follows: a) The petitioner was appointed as permanent Fair Price Shop dealer for Shop No.0826017, Budawada Village, J.Panguluru Mandal, Bapatia District under the DWACRA Group “Anjali Mahila Mandali’ about 10 years ago. Since the date of her appointment, the petitioner has been distributing commodities to the cardhodlers and has been running the said shop without any compliantor adverseremarks. > 4 VSJ ■ W.P.No.23137 of 2025 b) While the matter being so, an FIR dated 23.08.2025, was registered on the file of J.Panguluru Police Station in Cr.No.85 of 2025 against the petitioner and another, alleging diversion of PDS rice in an auto. Basing on the said FIR, the 5**^ respondent, along with other officials. inspected the petitioner’s shop on 26.08.2025. During the said inspection, it was recorded that there was no difference between the physical stock and the online stock, which clearly shows that the rice found in the auto on 23.08.2025 had no connection with her shop and that the FIR was registered solely on the false statement of the driver of the auto, without any supporting evidence. c) Despite finding no stock variation, the officials prepared a mediator report dated 26.08.2025 in the presence of mediators and orally instructed the petitioner not to distribute stock further. However, without issuing any show- cause notice, without affording any opportunity of hearing, and without passing any suspension order, they seized the stock in the petitioner’s fair price shop and handed it over to the 6**^ respondentA/illage Revenue Officer, who has no statutory role under the Essential Commodities Act or the Control Order, 2018, which is illegal arbitrary and violative of natural justice. d) Earlier also, the petitioner filed W.P.No.18597 of 2024 challenging the termination order 09.08.2024 before this Court, wherein this Court by order dated 09.09.2024 in l.A.No.1 of 2024, granted interim stay of the termination proceedings. The said writ petition is still pending adjudication. V 5 vs,J W.P.No.23137of2025 q) The grievance of the petitioner in the present writ petition is that, the stock in the petitioner’s fair price shop was seized through a mediator’s report dated 26.08.2025 and handed over the same to the 6**^ respondent is nothing but a blatant attempt to circumvent the stay order granted by this Court in W.P.No. 18597 of 2024. Further, preventing the petitioner from distributing essential commodities to the cardholders, without issuing any show-cause notice, without affording an opportunity of hearing, and without passing any suspension or cancellation order is illegal and arbitrary. Challenging the said action, the writ petition is filed. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned Assistant Government Pleader for Civil Supplies appearing for the respondents. 3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the respondents without following the due procedure, stopped supply of essential commodities to the petitioner. 4. 5. On the other hand, learned Assistant Government Pleader for Civil Supplies furnished a copy of instructions of the 3'“'' respondent, wherein it is stated that the petitioner is not entitled for allotment of essential commodities to her fair price shop for distribution to the cardholders, under the provisions of A.P. State Targetted Public Distribution System (Control) Order, 2018, since she is involved in a criminal case with regard to the functioning of the public distribution system. However, learned Assistant Government Pleader for Civil Supplies has 6 VS,J W.P.No.23137 of2025. admitted that the respondent authorities have not issued any show-cause notice nor called for an explanation from the petitioner. On a perusal of the entire material available on record, it is evident that 6. the respondent authorities, without issuing any show-cause notice or any order of suspension or cancellation of the petitioner’s authorization, stopped supply of essential commodities to the petitioner. In this regard, it is pertinent to refer to the judgment of the Full Bench of this Court in Oleti Tirupathamma v. District Supply Officer (City), Visakhapatnam and others^ wherein it was categorically held as follows: 7. “A statutory authority, it is trite, must act within the four comers of the statute in terms of the statutory orders and procedure laid down to suspend the licence. As already noticed hereinbefore, the authorities under the relevant orders have power to suspend the authorisation or licence of the dealer. Without applying its mind and without taking recourse thereto, the Court should not normally permit the authorities, unless extraordinary situation exists, to allow them to do something indirectly, which they cannot do it directly. If a broad proposition to this effect is laid down, the same, in a given case may amount to abuse of the process of law. The High Court while exercising its jurisdiction under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, acts sentinel qui vive and thus it has to protect the citizen from arbitrary and capricious action of the executive. If the licensing authority themselves upon application of mind come to the conclusion that the irregularities committed by the fair price shop dealer would warrant suspension of his licence, it may do so. But, in our considered opinion, the authority without taking recourse to the said action, cannot, refuse to supply the essential commodities. In the event an order of suspension of licence is passed, the authorities will have to make an alternative ^ 2002 (1) ALD 577 L 7 VS,J W.P.No.23137 of2025 arrangement. But. in a case of this nature, the card holders wouid be the worst sufferers inasmuch their essential corhmodities would not bd supplied to them at all. 8. In the present case on hand, the respondents without issuing any show- cause notice or without initiating disciplinary proceedings, if any, in accordance with law, cannot stop the supply of essential commodities to the petitioner, which is illegal and arbitrary in view of law laid down in the aforesaid Judgment. 9. In the light of the aforesaid facts and circumstances of the case, since no disciplinary action has been initiated against the petitioner, the respondents are hereby directed to supply the essential commodities to the petitioner’s fair price shop and allow the petitioner to distribute the essential commodities to the cardholders as dealer of Fair Price Shop No.0826017, Budawada Village, J.Panguluru Mandal, Bapatla District. With the above directions, the Writ Petition is disposed of. There shall 10. be no order as to costs. As a sequel, miscellaneous applications, pending, if any, shall also stand closed. Sd/- K. TATA RAO DEPUTY REGISTRAR //TRUE COPY// SECTION OFFICER To, 1. The Principal Secretary, Civil Supplies Department, State of Andhra Pradesh, Secretariat, Velagapudi, Amaravati, Guntur District. The District Collector Civil Supplies, Bapatla District, Bapatla. The Revenue Divisional Officer, Chirala, Bapatla District. The Tahsiidar, Janakavaram Panguluru Mandal, Bapatla District. The Enforcement Deputy Tahsiidar, Janakavaram Panguluru Mandal, Bapatla District. The Village Revenue Officer VRO, Budavada Village, Janakavaram Panguluru Mandal Bapatla District. One CC to Sri Gajjala Mallikarjuna Reddy, Advocate [OPUC] Two CCs to GP for Civil Supplies, High Court of Andhra Pradesh [OUT] Two CD Copies 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. 7. 8. 9. RAM / HIGH COURT DATED:01/09/2025 ORDER WP NO. 23137 OF 2025 y'- c? 1T» 5( 17 SEP 2025 ntSKtioii^* Co ' 'aty DISPOSING OF THE WP WITHOUT COSTS