APHC010588202024 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) [3311] WEDNESDAY, THE EIGHTH DAY OF JANUARY TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE PRESENT THE HONOURABLE MS JUSTICE B S BHANUMATHI WRIT PETITION NO: 30678/2024 Between: Brahmananda Rao and Others ...PETITIONER(S) AND The State Of Ap and Others ...RESPONDENT(S) Counsel for the Petitioner(S): 1. K SRINIVAS Counsel for the Respondent(S): 1. GP FOR CIVIL SUPPLIES The Court made the following Order: This writ petition is filed under Article 226 of Constitution of India seeking the following relief: “…pleased to issue a Writ of Mandamus or any other appropriate writ, order or direction declaring the action of the respondents more particularly the 4th respondent in issuing notification vide Rc.NO.1134/2024-E, dated 20.12.2024 is contrary to the G.O.Ms.No.10, dated 03.09.2024 is illegal, arbitrary and violation of Article 14, 19 and 21, consequently set aside the same and pass…” W.P.No.30678 of 2024 Dt:08.01.2025 2 02. The writ petition is filed challenging the proceedings bifurcating the fair price shops of the petitioners by rejecting their objections and further notifying to fill up the dealer of the newly created fair price shop on bifurcation. 03. Earlier when some dealers challenged endorsement/ notices issued by Revenue Divisional Officer/ Tahsildar, by filing several writ petitions on the ground that such actions were contrary to G.O.Ms.No. 15, Consumer Affairs, Food and Civil Supplies (CS-I), dated 01.08.2018 and G.O.Ms.No.11, Consumer Affairs, Food and Civil Supplies (CS.I) Department, dated 09.09.2020, guidelines were issued by this High Court vide Order dated 21.10.2024 in W.P. No.23521 of 2024 and batch of petitions. 04. The petitioners submitted explanation on 08.10.2024 and 30.10.2024. However, the 4th respondent issued notification vide Rc.No.1134 of 2024- E, dated 20.12.2024 to fill up the dealers of fair price shops of the petitioners bifurcated contrary to G.O.Ms.No.10, dated 03.09.2024 and circular dated 15.09.2024, making running of the fair price shops economically inviable. 05. In respect of all the petitioners, the common grounds of objections raised by the dealers are as below: i. The number of cards of the dead persons was not excluded while counting the figure 800 which is relevant for the purpose of identifying a shop for bifurcation. ii. Some of the cardholders migrated from out of area of the fair price shop, but their number was not excluded while counting the number 800. iii. While providing the number of cards on bifurcation, the economic viability to run the fair price shop which is the object of G.O.Ms.No.35, dated 17.09.2017 of Consumer Affairs, Food & Civil Supplies (CS-I) Department, G.O.Ms.No.10 of Consumer Affairs, Food & Civil Supplies (CS-I) Department, dated 03.09.2024 was not considered. W.P.No.30678 of 2024 Dt:08.01.2025 3 iv. The points raised in the objections were not answered. v. The concerned authority mentioned that economic viability is secured by other schemes such as by selling the products as specified by the government as per requirement of residents/cardholders in the limits of the said shop in the interest of their self-reliance and taking up services like 5 kgs LPG cylinders, retail sales and postal/IPPB services through Department of Food and Public Distribution, but as they are not allotted and they are not part of the scheme of regularization of the shops, such answer do not meet the objection. vi. After bifurcation, the minimum number of cards to be attached to a fair price shop as per G.O.Ms.No.35 dated 17.09.2007 which still holds good and followed in G.O.Ms.No.10 has not been adhered to. Previously, ration cards to persons above poverty line (APL) and below poverty line (BPL) were included in the minimum number of cards attached to a fair price shop, whereas now there are no ration cards of APL issued and to compensate such number, the number of BPL cards is not increased by the same number. The economic viability cannot be ensured unless the minimum number of BPL cards is increased on par with the total number of APL and BPL cards in the G.O.Ms.No.35. 06. Keeping them in view, the learned counsel for the petitioners and the learned Assistant Government Pleader advanced arguments. 07. Similar to the present case, in W.P.No.23521 of 2024 and batch of cases, after having been satisfied that in most of the cases, the objections were not duly answered or they are not meeting the objections raised by the dealers, to secure the uniformity in regularization of the fair price shops and their bifurcations in conformity with the G.O.s while achieving their objectives, the following guidelines were issued by order dated 21.10.2024. a) Cards of the dead person(s): W.P.No.30678 of 2024 Dt:08.01.2025 4 i. The petitioner(s)/dealer(s) has/have to submit the explanation to the concerned authority with the details of the ration cards with the card number/ name(s) of the cardholder etc. Then the authorities have to examine the same and delete the card from the shop of the dealer where the sole cardholder died and retain the card(s) where any of the family of the deceased cardholder is drawing the commodity. b) Cards of the migrated person(s): i. Since the most of the dealers raised the objections that the number of migration cards shall be excluded while deciding the figure 800 for the purpose of bifurcation of the shops, the DSO shall take the average figure of the number of cards availed during the last 12 months period i.e. from September, 2023 to August, 2024 for the purpose of identifying the figure 800. ii. Since most of the dealers have a grievance that while examining the element of economic viability, in G.O.Ms.No.35 apart from BPL cards, APL cards were also taken into consideration, whereas in spite of increase in the expenses to run the shop, G.O.Ms.No.10 has not considered the economic viability insofar as APL cards which are now not existing and in G.O.Ms.No.10 the figures relating to BPL cards alone is stated. Therefore, to balance the interest, without deviating from G.O.Ms.No.10, the objection of the dealers with regard to the same can be meted if maximum figure 450 for rural area, 550 for urban area and 650 for corporation area is considered as the minimum figure to be allotted to the existing shop on bifurcation. c) On submission of such representations by the dealers within one month, the authorities shall answer each objection raised by the dealer and pass appropriate order within two weeks thereafter. 08. The writ petition is disposed of by setting aside the proceedings impugned in this writ petition insofar as the shop(s) of the petitioner(s) with a W.P.No.30678 of 2024 Dt:08.01.2025 5 direction the authorities to follow the same as in W.P. No. 23521 of 2024, dated 21.10.2024. There shall be no order as to costs. Interim orders granted earlier, if any, shall stand vacated. Pending miscellaneous applications, if any, shall stand closed. ________________________ JUSTICE B.S.BHANUMATHI Date: 08.01.2025 SCH W.P.No.30678 of 2024 Dt:08.01.2025 6 385 HON’BLE Ms. JUSTICE B.S.BHANUMATHI WRIT PETITION NO: 30678/2024 Date: 08.01.2025 SCH