APHC010600652024 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) [3311] MONDAY ,THE TWENTIETH DAY OF JANUARY TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE PRESENT THE HONOURABLE MS JUSTICE B S BHANUMATHI WRIT PETITION NO: 31322/2024 Between: Shaik Shahanaz Begum ...PETITIONER AND The State Of Andhra Pradesh and Others ...RESPONDENT(S) Counsel for the Petitioner: 1. J.JYOTHI Counsel for the Respondent(S): 1. GP FOR CIVIL SUPPLIES The Court made the following: 2 W.P.No.31322 of 2024 ORDER: The Writ Petition is filed under Article 226 of Constitution of India seeking the following relief: “…to issue any writ, order or direction more particularly one in the nature of Writ of Mandamus declaring the action of the 3rd respondent in issuing the proceedings Rc.(M).1207/2024 dated 13.12.2024 keeping the writ petitioner under suspension for fair price shop no.1381043, Yemmiganur Town and Mandal, Kurnool District without giving reasonable opportunity of submitting explanation and on concocted panchanama as illegal, arbitrary against to the principles of natural justice and consequently set aside the same by permitting the writ petitioner to supply the stocks to the card holders of fair price shop no.1381043, Yemmiganur Town and Mandal, Kurnool District and pass…” 02. The case of the petitioner is briefly as follows: The petitioner was appointed on 30.08.2024, as incharge of fair price shop No.1381043, Yemmiganur Town and Mandal, Kurnool District, due to ill-health of the previous dealer. On 06.12.2024, the 5th respondent, along with Regional Vigilance and Enforcement Department staff, inspected the petitioner’s fair price shop and took the signature of the petitioner on a white paper and submitted a false report to the 3rd respondent. Subsequently, the 3rd respondent basing on the report of the 4th respondent, issued a show cause notice dated 13.12.2024 to the petitioner calling for her explanation by 28.12.2024, which was received by her on 17.12.2024. But, without waiting for the 3 W.P.No.31322 of 2024 time given, the 3rd respondent suspended the dealership of the petitioner vide proceedings in Rc.(M).1207/2024 dated 13.12.2024. Thus, this writ petition was filed. 03. The learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that there was no stock variation at all at the time of inspection and that the authorities had taken the signature of the dealer on a white blank paper stating that it shall be used for official purpose to communicate a report, but only after repeated requests, a copy of panchanama had been furnished to the petitioner. A perusal of the copy of the panchanama shows that it was prepared adjusting the text of the contents using the blank signed document. In this regard, he further submitted that the line space maintained throughout the panchanama in three pages is constant except in the last paragraph, which was inserted to suit the case of the government. He further submitted that the petitioner enclosed photographs showing availability of stock in support of the contention that the entire stock was available, yet deficit in stock was shown. 04. The learned Assistant Government Pleader for Civil Supplies placed on record the written instructions of the 4th respondent issued vide Rc.B.1356/2024, dated 06.01.2025, which are replica of the impugned order. 05. A perusal of the copy of the panchanama filed by the petitioner as well as copy enclosed to the written instructions clearly reveals that the last paragraph was prepared in such a way, the space used for the paragraph was adjusted to complete the contents. Thus, there is prima facie case in favour of the petitioner. 4 W.P.No.31322 of 2024 06. Accordingly, the writ petition is allowed by setting aside the impugned order dated 13.12.2024. There shall be no order as to costs. Pending miscellaneous applications, if any, shall stand closed. ________________________ JUSTICE B.S.BHANUMATHI Date: 20.01.2025 NSM 5 W.P.No.31322 of 2024 75 HON’BLE Ms. JUSTICE B.S.BHANUMATHI WRIT PETITION NO: 31322/2024 Date: 20.01.2025 NSM