APHC010472572025 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH TUESDAY, THE SIXTEENTH DAY OF SEPTEMBER TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE THE HONOURABLE SMT JUSTICE V.SUJATHA WRIT PETITION NO: 24522/2025 Between: 1. M. PRASHANTHI, , W/O. R. SANTHOSH KUMAR, AGED ABOUT 24 YEARS, OCC- TEMPORARY FAIR PRICE SHOP DEALER, 2ND LEADER(SECRETARY) OF SRI DHARSHAN PODUPU LAKSHMI(SHG) GROUP, GANESH NAGAR, KURNOOL URBAN, KURNOOL, R/O. H.NO. 87 KURNOOL, KURNOOL DISTRICT 1. THE STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH, , REP. BY ITS PRINCIPAL SECRETARY, CONSUMER AFFAIRS, FOOD AND CIVIL SUPPLIES, SECRETARIAT, VELAGAPUDI, GUNTUR DISTRICT 2. THE COLLECTOR CS, KURNOOL DISTRICT, 3. THE REVENUE DIVISIONAL OFFICER, KURNOOL, KURNOOL DISTRICT 4. THE DEPUTY TAHSILDHARCS, KURNOOL URBAN, KURNOOL 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 to issue an appropriate writ, order or direction more particularly one in the nature of Writ of Mandamus, declaring the impugned orders of the 3rd IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) THE SIXTEENTH DAY OF SEPTEMBER TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SMT JUSTICE V.SUJATHA WRIT PETITION NO: 24522/2025 M. PRASHANTHI, , W/O. R. SANTHOSH KUMAR, AGED ABOUT 24 TEMPORARY FAIR PRICE SHOP DEALER, 2ND LEADER(SECRETARY) OF SRI DHARSHAN PODUPU LAKSHMI(SHG) GROUP, GANESH NAGAR, KURNOOL URBAN, KURNOOL, R/O. H.NO. 87-1109-16-141, GANESH NAGAR, B CAMP, KURNOOL, KURNOOL DISTRICT ...PETITIONER AND THE STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH, , REP. BY ITS PRINCIPAL SECRETARY, CONSUMER AFFAIRS, FOOD AND CIVIL SUPPLIES, SECRETARIAT, VELAGAPUDI, GUNTUR DISTRICT THE COLLECTOR CS, KURNOOL DISTRICT, KURNOOL THE REVENUE DIVISIONAL OFFICER, KURNOOL, KURNOOL THE DEPUTY TAHSILDHARCS, KURNOOL URBAN, KURNOOL ...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 appropriate writ, order or direction more particularly one in Mandamus, declaring the impugned orders of the 3rd IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH [3333] THE SIXTEENTH DAY OF SEPTEMBER THE HONOURABLE SMT JUSTICE V.SUJATHA M. PRASHANTHI, , W/O. R. SANTHOSH KUMAR, AGED ABOUT 24 TEMPORARY FAIR PRICE SHOP DEALER, 2ND LEADER(SECRETARY) OF SRI DHARSHAN PODUPU LAKSHMI(SHG) GROUP, GANESH NAGAR, KURNOOL URBAN, NAGAR, B CAMP, ...PETITIONER THE STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH, , REP. BY ITS PRINCIPAL SECRETARY, CONSUMER AFFAIRS, FOOD AND CIVIL SUPPLIES, KURNOOL THE REVENUE DIVISIONAL OFFICER, KURNOOL, KURNOOL THE DEPUTY TAHSILDHARCS, KURNOOL URBAN, KURNOOL ...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 appropriate writ, order or direction more particularly one in Mandamus, declaring the impugned orders of the 3rd 2 VS,J W.P.No.24522 of 2025 respondent vide Rc.DT(LR) 752/2025, dated 25.06.2025, in cancelling the authorization of the petitioner fair price shop dealer to Shop No. 1382144 of Kurnool Urban, Kurnool without issuing any notice, as illegal, arbitrary and in flagrant disregard to law and consequently set aside the aforesaid impugned orders of the 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 to direct the respondents to continue the petitioner as fair price shop dealer to Shop No.1382144 of Kurnool Urban, Kurnool by suspending the impugned orders of the 3rd respondent in Rc.DT(LR)752/2025, dated 25.06.2025, pending disposal of the above writ petition and pass Counsel for the Petitioner: 1. K NAGA PHANINDRA Counsel for the Respondent(S): 1. GP FOR CIVIL SUPPLIES 3 VS,J W.P.No.24522 of 2025 The Court made the following Order: The present Writ Petition came to be filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India seeking the following relief:- “… to issue an appropriate writ, order or direction more particularly one in the nature of Writ of Mandamus, declaring the impugned orders of the 3rd respondent vide Rc.DT(LR)752/2025, dated 25.06.2025, in cancelling the authorization of the petitioner fair price shop dealer to Shop No.1382144 of Kurnool Urban, Kurnool, without issuing any notice, as illegal, arbitrary and in flagrant disregard to law and consequently set aside the aforesaid impugned orders of the 3rd respondent and to pass such other order or orders ….” 2. The petitioner was appointed as a temporary fair price shop dealer for shop No.1382144 of Kurnool Urban, Kurnool, in pursuance of the appointment orders of the 3rd respondent dated 26.12.2023. Since the date of her appointment, the petitioner has been distributing the essential commodities without there being any complaints from any corner. 3. The case of the petitioner is that because of the change in political scenario, some of the politicians in the locality started pressuring the respondents herein to stall the release of essential commodities to the petitioner on one pretext or the other in order to appoint their own persons. 4. While the matter being so, on relevant information received, the Deputy Tahsildar (CS), Kurnool, along with the PC-2165, III Town PS, Kurnool and Ward Revenue Secretary, Typist Colony, Kurnool Urban, have proceeded to the petitioner’s shop on 16.06.2025 and conducted inspection over the petitioner’s shop and found four plastic bags with rice, being transported in auto bearing No.AP 21 TW 1283 and upon enquiry it is alleged that the auto 4 VS,J W.P.No.24522 of 2025 driver has revealed that one Maddiletty, Hotel Owner near Nandyal has hired his auto for transportation of PDS rice from the petitioner’s fair price shop. Accordingly, a report has been submitted by the Deputy Tahsildar on 16.06.2025. Basing on the said report, the petitioner’s authorization was straightaway cancelled vide impugned orders dated 25.06.2025, even without issuing show cause notice, calling for explanation from the petitioner. Challenging which, the present writ petition is filed. 5. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned Assistant Government Pleader for Civil Supplies representing the respondents. 6. On a perusal of the impugned proceedings, as rightly pointed out by the petitioner, except referring to the report of the Deputy Tahsildar, (CS), Kurnool dated 16.06.2025, nowhere it has been referred as to whether any show cause notice has been issued to the petitioner, calling for explanation before passing the impugned proceedings i.e., cancelling the petitioner’s authorization, which in fact is in violation of principles of natural justice. 7. The Hon’ble Division Bench of this Court, in Writ Appeal No.122 of 2025 vide order dated 28.03.2025, has considered a similar issue and held follows: “11. Unfortunately, a perusal of the RDO’s order shows that he has not even attempted to hold an enquiry and he has allowed himself to be swayed away by the report of the Tahsildar, without trying to test the veracity of the explanation offered by the petitioner. the learned single judge erred in appreciating the said aspects while dismissing the writ petition. As the respondent No.4 has not followed the said procedure and passed the order in violation of principles of natural justice, driving the petitioner towards alternative remedy does not arise and the order vide proceedings Rc.no.B2/1262/2023 dated 28.07.2025, cannot be sustained and the same is accordingly set-aside. The said order of the respondent No.3 dated 5 VS,J W.P.No.24522 of 2025 19.07.2025 vide Rc.No.K6/436/2023, which confirmed the order of the respondent No.4 is also set-aside. The matter is remanded back to the original primary authority for fresh consideration for conducting proper enquiry in the light of the observations made herein.” 8. As no enquiry has been conducted by the respondents before cancelling the petitioner’s authorization, is a major penalty, which is in violation of the principles of natural justice. As the facts in the above said writ appeal and the facts in the case on hand are one and the same, this Court deems it appropriate to allow the writ petition under similar lines, setting aside the impugned proceedings by remanding the matter back to the original primary authority for fresh consideration for conducting proper enquiry in the light of the observations made therein. 9. Accordingly, the Writ Petition is allowed by setting aside the impugned proceedings of the 3rd respondent dated 25.06.2025 and the matter is remanded back to the original primary authority for fresh consideration. It is needless to state that the respondent authorities are directed to supply the essential commodities to the petitioner’s fair price, pending finalization of disciplinary proceedings. There shall be no order as to costs. As a sequel, Interlocutory Applications pending, if any, shall stand closed __________________ JUSTICE V.SUJATHA Dated: 16.09.2025 MDP