IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) MONDAY, THE SIXTH DAY OF JANUARY TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE PRESENT THE HON’BLE MS JUSTICE B. S. BHANUMATHI WRIT PETITION NO: 31093 OF 2024 Between: Krosuru Venkatesh, S/o. Venkaiah, aged 30 years, Occ: Fair Price Shop Dealer, R/o Jayanthi Rampuram village, BollapalliMandal, Palnadu District. ...PETITIONER AND 1. The State of Andhra Pradesh, Rep. by its Principal Secretary, Civil Supplied Department, Velagapudi, Amaravathi, Guntur District. 2. The Revenue Divisional Officer, Narasaraopet, Palnadu District. 3. The Tahsildar, Bollapalli Mandal, Palnadu District. ...RESPONDENTS 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 a Writ of Mandamus or any other appropriate Writ Order or direction, declaring the impugned order Rc.No.1545/2024-G dated 22-08-2024 on the file of Revenue Divisional Officer, Narasaraopet, Palanadu District, as illegal, arbitrary and vitiated as the same is malafide. lA NO: 1 OF 2024 Petition under Section 151 CPC praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed in support of the writ petition, the High Court may be pleased may be pleased to suspend the impugned order Rc.No.1545/2024-G dated 22-08-2024 on the file of Revenue Divisional Officer, Narasaraopet, Palanadu District, pending disposal of the above Writ Petition. Counsel for the Petitioner : SRI D. KRISHNA MURTHY Counsel for the Respondents: GP FOR CIVIL SUPPLIES The Court made the following: ORDER 1 BSB,J W.P.No.31093 of 2024 r APHC010596642024 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) [3311] MONDAY, THE SIXTH DAY OF JANUARY TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE PRESENT THE HONOURABLE MS JUSTICE B S BHANUMATHI WRIT PETITION NO: 31093/2024 Between: Krosuru Venkatesh ...PETITIONER AND The State Of Andhra Pradesh and Others ...RESPONDENT(S) Counsel for the Petitioner: 1.D KRISHNA MURTHY Counsel for the Respondent(S): 1.GP FOR CIVIL SUPPLIES The Court made the following: 2 BSB, J W.P.No.31093 of 2024 r ^DER: This 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 order or direction, declaring the impugned order Rc.No.1545/2024-G, dated 22.08.2024 on the file of the Revenue Divisional Officer, Narasaraopet, Palnadu District, as illegal, arbitrary and vitiated as the same is mala fide and pass such orders as deem fit and proper in the facts and circumstances of the case.” 2. Heard the learned counsel for the parties. 3. The case of the petitioner is as follows: The petitioner was appointed as a dealer of fair price shop No.0721007 of Jayanthirampuram village, Bollapalli Mandal, Guntur District, on permanent basis, vide proceedings Rc.No.6859/2011-B , dated 20.02.2013. Since the petitioner refused to resign from the dealership, the Civil Supplies Deputy Tahsildar, Vinukonda, and the Village Revenue Officer, Dharmavaram village of Dhurgi mandal. inspected the shop of the petitioner on 17.08.2024 and alleged that they found some irregularities and prepared a mediatornama with false and fictitious figures showing shortage of three (3) quintals of fortified rice. The Revenue Divisional Officer, Narasaraopet, issued a show-cause 3 BSB, J W.P.No.31093 of 2024 notice to the petitioner on 22.08.2024 alleging diversion of 200 kgs of rice to the black market and directing the petitioner to submit explanation within ten (10) days from the date of receipt of notice. On the same day, the impugned order was passed suspending the dealership of the petitioner without waiting till submission of explanation and without following the procedure under clause 8(4) of the Andhra Pradesh State Targeted Public Distribution System (Control) Order, 2018. Moreover, since 20.02.2024, more than 90 days elapsed, yet, the enquiry has not been concluded nor is the authorization restored. Since the dealership is only the livelihood of the petitioner, in view of the deprivation of the livelihood, the petitioner is suffering. Hence, this writ petition is filed. 4. The learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the impugned order ex facie indicates that it is a mechanically processed order at the behest of others. In this regard, he submitted that though the name of the petitioner is Krosuru Venkatesh, in the next paragraph of the impugned order, it was recorded as Sri Perumalla Venkata Satyavathi and the variation in the stock is shown as 200 Kgs., whereas the alleged variation in the stock is 300 Kgs. However, he further submitted that in the impugned order suspending the authorization of the petitioner, again the stock is shown as 300 Kgs., and the name of 4 BSB, J W.P.No.31093 of 2024 the petitioner and the shop number are correctly shown. Furthermore, he contended that in spite of lapse of 90 days, the enquiry has not been concluded and the impugned order was passed suspending the dealership of the petitioner for an indefinite period. I 5. The learned Assistant Government Pleader represented that he had no written instructions, however, requested to pass appropriate orders. 6. A perusal of the show-cause notice and the impugned order would disclose that there is no application of mind by the concerned authorities and in a mechanical and routine manner, the impugned proceedings were issued. That apart, in spite of lapse of (90) days, enquiry has not been concluded. As rightly contended by the learned counsel for the petitioner, the order of suspension is also for indefinite period without specifying the exact period, reasons, the impugned order is liable to be set aside. an For all these 7. In the result, the Writ Petition is allowed setting aside the impugned order Rc.No.1545/2024-G, dated 22.08.2024, of the Revenue Divisional Officer, Narasaraopet, Palnadu district. Flowever, the respondent authorities are at liberty to proceed with the enquiry as per law uninfluenced by any of the observations made in this order. 5 BSB,j W.P.No.31093 of 2024 There shall be no order as to costs. Pending miscellaneous petitions, if any, shall stand closed. ^sist^tregistrar I sect/on officer //TRUE COPY// To, 1. The Revenue Divisional Officer State of Andhra Guntur District. 2. Narasaraopet. Palnadu District. Palnadu District. 3. The Tahsildar, Bollapalli Mandal, 4. One CC to Sri D. Krishna Murthy, Advocate Civil Supplies [OPUC] High Court of Andhra Pradesh 6. Three C.D. Copies. Cnr ▼ HIGH COURT DATED:06/01/2025 ORDER g 0 J JAN 2025 . Current Section Si,£^SPATCH€2,^^ WP.No.31093 of 2024 Co ALLOWING THE W.P. WITHOUT COSTS