IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH :: AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) MONDAY, THE TWENTY SEVENTH DAY OF JANUARY TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE PRESENT THE HONOURABLE MS JUSTICE B S BHANUMATHI WRIT PETITION NO: 1596 OF 2025 Between: G Narayanamma, W/o G. Venugopal Reddy, 50 years Shop No.1318005, Occupation Fair Price Shop Dealer, Thadakanapalli Village, Kallur Mandal, Kurnool District. ...PETITIONER AND 1. The State of Andhra Pradesh, Rep. by its Principal Secretary, Civil Supplies Department Secretariat Buildings, Velagapudi, Amaravathi.' 2. The Collector (CS), Kurnool, Kurnool District. 3. The Revenue Divisional Officer, Kurnool District 4. The Tahsildar, Kallur Mandal, Kurnool District. ...RESPONDENTS Petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India is filed 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 proceedings Rc.DT(LR)1415/2024 dated 23.12.2024 issued by the 3 respondent in cancelling the Fair Price Shop Authorization of the petitioner in Shop No. 1318005, Thadakanapalli Village, Kallur Mandal, Kurnool District as illegal, improper, unjust arbitrary, colorable exercise of power, without considering the explanations of the petitioner, without following the procedure and contrary to Andhra Pradesh state targeted public distribution system (Control) order, 2018. rd lA NO: 1 OF 2025 Petition under Section 151 CPC is filed praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed in support of the petition, the High Court’^may be pleased to stay the proceedings in Rc.DT(LR)1415/2 024 dated 23.12.2024 issued by respondent duly permitting the petitioner to run the Fair Price Shop No.1318005 Thadakanapalli Village Kallur Mandal, Kurnool District pending disposal of the writ petition. Counsel for the Petitioner :SRI. MAHADEVA KANTHRIGALA Counsel for the Respondent No’s. 1 to 4 : GP FOR CIVIL SUPPLIES The Court made the following ORDER: \ V APHC010020472025 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) [3311] ?5. MONDAY ,THE TWENTY SEVENTH DAY OF JANUARY TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE PRESENT THE HONOURABLE MS JUSTICE B S BHANUMATHI WRIT PETITION NO: 1596/2025 Between; ...PETITIONER G Narayanamma AND ...RESPONDENT{S) The State Of Andhra Pradesh and Others Counsel for the Petitioner: 1.MAHADEVA KANTHRIGALA Counsel for the Respondent(S): 1.GP FOR CIVIL SUPPLIES The Court made the following: 2 % BSB, J W.P.No.l596of 2025 ► ORDER: This writ petition is 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 proceedings Rc.DT(LR)1415/2024, dated 23.12.2024 issued by the 3'"^ respondent in cancelling the Fair Price Shop Authorization of the petitioner in Shop No.1318005 Thadakanapalli Village, Kallur Mandal, Kurnool District as illegal, improper, unjust arbitrary, colorable exercise of power without considering the explanations of the petitioner, without following the procedure and contrary to Andhra Pradesh State Targeted Public Distribution System (Control) Order 2018, and to pass such other order/s ” 3. The case of the petitioner, in brief, is as follows: The petitioner was appointed as a fair price shop dealer for shop No.1318005, Thadakanapalli village, Kallur Mandal, Kurnool district vide proceedings Lr.No.B.270/2014, dated 15.05.2014. Since the date of her appointment, the petitioner has been distributing essential commodities to cardholders without any interruption. While things stood thus, on 27.11.2024, the 4^'^ respondent submitted a report vide proceedings Lr.No.Rc.B.975/2024, alleging that on 26.11.2024, the Mandal Revenue Inspector and the Village Revenue Officer inspected the petitioner’s shop in the presence of mediators and found discrepancies in the stock. Based^n this report, the 3^'^ respondent issued a show-cause notice vide proceedings Rc.DT (LR)1415/2024 dated 29.11.2024, proposing to 3 BSB,J W.P.No.l596of 2025 cancel the authorization of petitioner’s fair price shop. Upon receiving the show-cause notice, the petitioner submitted a detailed explanation. However, without properly considering the explanation, the 3 respondent issued the impugned proceedings. Hence, this writ petition. rd Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned Assistant Government Pleader for Civil Supplies appearing for the respondents. 2. The learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the alleged variation in stock is negligible and falls within the permissible limits as per Clause 29(a) of the Control Order, 2018. He contended that the impugned order was passed at the behest of political leaders. Further, he argued that the appellate authority failed to hear the petitioner and pass interim protection in spite of a good case in the petitioner’s favor. 3. 4. The learned Assistant Government Pleader for the respondents placed on record the written instructions dated 25.01.2025 of the 3 respondent. He submitted that since the petitioner had filed an appeal, the petitioner could have approached the appellate authority for interim protection, if necessary. rd 5. In reply, the learned counsel for the petitioner contended that as the appellate authority failed to heed to the petitioner’s requests, the petitioner had no alternative remedy but to approach this court by filing a writ petition. 6. As seen from the record, it is observed that the variation in stock at the petitioner’s shop is as follows: ✓ 4 BSB, J W.P.No.l596of 2025 SI. EC Name Opening balance Received quantity (kgs) Total Stock Issued (kgs) Epos balance (kgs) Ground Balance (kgs) variation (kgs) No. (kgs) (kgs) Fortified Rice 643 18612 19255 17562 1693 1350 (-)343 1 Sugar Pkts 1250 120 120 0 2 129 1121 1130 3 Ragulu 426 0 426 153 273 273 0 Redgram 96 1000 1096 1073 23 23 0 4 7. The contents of the above table indicate that the petitioner was handling approximately 20 tons of rice, while the recorded variation is deficit of 343 kgs. As per Clause 29(a) of the Control Order, 2018, a variation of 1.5% of the stock for the month is allowed. In light of this permissible limit, the variation in the stock is very negligible. As such, it is a fit case to pass orders in favour of the petitioner, in view of the inaction of the appellate authority. 8. In the result, the writ petition is disposed of by directing the appellate authority to dispose of the appeal filed by the petitioner within two (02) months from the date of receipt of this court’s order. Meanwhile, the impugned order under appeal is stayed. There shall be no order as to costs. Pending miscellaneous applications, if any, shall stand closed. Sd/- K. TATA RAO deputy registrar //TRUE COPY// SECTION OFFICER 1. The Principal Secretary, Civil Supplies Department, State of Andhra Pradesh, Secretariat Buildings, Velagapudi, Amaravathi.' 2. The Collector (CS), Kurnool, Kurnool District. 3. The Revenue Divisional Officer, Kurnool District To, ▼ V V 4. The Tahsildar, Kallur Mandal, Kurnool District. 5. One CC to SRI. MAHADEVA KANTHRIGALA, Advocate [OPUC] 6. Two CCs to GP FOR CIVIL SUPPLIES, High Court Of Andhra Pradesh. [OUT] 7. Three CD Copies PRK HIGH COURT DATED:27/01/2025 ORDER WP.No.1596 of 2025 0 7 MAR 2025 B Current Seciton DISPOSING OF THE W.P. WITHOUT COSTS