APHC010213722022 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) [3333] MONDAY,THE THIRD DAY OF NOVEMBER TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SMT JUSTICE V.SUJATHA WRIT PETITION NO: 12900/2022 Between: 1. G.RAMADASU, S/O G.NAGANNA AGED ABOUT 41 YEARS, FAIR PRICE SHOP DEALER (37), CHANDOLI VILLAGE H/O PANDIKONA PATTIKONDA MANDAL, KURNOOL DISTRICT, ANDHRA PRADESH. ...PETITIONER AND 1. STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH, , REP. BY ITS PRINCIPAL SECRETARY CIVIL SUPPLIES DEPARTMENT, SECRETARIAT, VELAGAPUDI, AMARAVATHI. 2. THE JOINTCOLLECTOR, KURNOOL DISTRICT. 3. THE REVENUE DIVISIONAL OFFICER ADONI DIVISION, , KURNOOL DISTRICT. 4. THE PATTIKONDA MANDAL TAHSILDAR, H/O PANDIKONA PATTIKONDA MANDAL KURNOOL DISTRICT. ...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 topleased to issue a Writ, Order or Direction more particularly one in the nature of WRIT OF MANDAMUS declaring the impugned show cause notice in RC.M.6326/2021, dated 29.09.2021 and consequential suspension order in Rc.M.6326/2021 dated 24.03.2022 issued by 4th respondent and thereby not supplying the commodities to the petitioner to run the Fair Price Shop of Chandoli Village, H/o Pandikona Village, Pattikonda Village, Kurnool District as illegal, arbitrary, contrary to the provisions of the A.P. Schedule 2 VS,J W.P.No.12900 of 2022 commodities distribution by card system orders, 1983 apart from violation of principles of natural Justice by setting aside the same and consequentially direct the respondents 4 and 5 to continue the Petitioner as F. P. Shop dealer of 37 of Chandoli village, H/o Pandikona Pattikonda Mandal, Kurnool District duly supplying the commodities and pass IA NO: 1 OF 2022 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 pleased to suspend the impugned proceedings in RC.M.6326/2021, dated 24.03.2022 issued by 4th respondent, and consequentially direct the 5th respondent to supply the commodities to the petitioner to run the Fair Price Shop no.37 of Chandoli Village, H/o Pandikona, Pattikonda Mandal, Kurnool District pending disposal of the Writ Petition in the interest of justice and pass IA NO: 2 OF 2022 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 Pleased to vacate the Interim Order granted in W.P.No.12900 of 2022 dated 02-05-2022 and dismiss the above Writ Petition with costs as it is devoid of any merits and to pass Counsel for the Petitioner: 1. A CHANDRAIH NAIDU Counsel for the Respondent(S): 1. GP FOR CIVIL SUPPLIES The Court made the following: 3 VS,J W.P.No.12900 of 2022 ORDER: The present Writ Petition came to be filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India seeking the following relief:- “….to issue a Writ, Order or Direction more particularly one in the nature of WRIT OF MANDAMUS declaring the impugned show cause notice in RC.M.6326/2021, dated 29.09.2021 and consequential suspension order in Rc.M.6326/2021 dated 24.03.2022 issued by 4th respondent and thereby not supplying the commodities to the petitioner to run the Fair Price Shop of Chandoli Village, H/o Pandikona Village, Pattikonda Village, Kurnool District as illegal, arbitrary, contrary to the provisions of the A.P. Schedule commodities distribution by card system orders, 1983 apart from violation of principles of natural Justice by setting aside the same and consequentially direct the respondents 4 and 5 to continue the Petitioner as F. P. Shop dealer of 37 of Chandoli village, H/o Pandikona Pattikonda Mandal, Kurnool District duly supplying the commodities and pass….” 2. The petitioner herein was appointed as fair price shop dealer of shop No.37 of Chandoli village, Pattikonda mandal, Kurnool district in the year 2010 and thenceforth, the petitioner has been distributing essential commodities to the cardholders without there being any complaint from whomsoever concerned. 3. While the matter stood thus, basing on an inspection report submitted by the 5th respondent recommending to initiate action against the petitioner as a variation of (+)13.50 quintals of rice, (+)26 kilograms of sugar was found in the petitioner’s fair price shop, the 4th respondent issued a show cause notice to the petitioner seeking his explanation, to which the petitioner submitted an explanation on 07.10.2021. Thereafter, the respondent authorities have not 4 VS,J W.P.No.12900 of 2022 supplied essential commodities to the petitioner’s fair price shop and subsequently, without conducting any enquiry, the impugned proceedings dated 24.03.2022 were issued placing the petitioner’s authorization under suspension. Aggrieved by the same, the present writ petition is filed. 4. When the writ petition came up for hearing on 02.05.2022, this Court has passed an interim order suspending the operation of the impugned proceedings dated 24.03.2022 issued by the 4th respondent and further directed the 5th respondent to supply the commodities to the petitioner to run the fair price shop No.37 of Chandoli village, H/o Pandikona, Pattikonda mandal, Kurnool District pending disposal of the writ petition. 5. Heard Mr. A. Chandraiah Naidu, learned counsel for the petitioner and learned Assistant Government Pleader for Civil Supplies. 6. During the course of arguments, learned Assistant Government Pleader has furnished a copy of the proceedings of the 4th respondent in Rc.M6326/2021, dated 25.05.2022 by way of which, the petitioner’s authorization was restored in compliance to the interim order passed by this Court dated 02.05.2022. 7. Admittedly, the 4th respondent vide the impugned proceedings dated 24.03.2022 has suspended the authorization of the petitioner’s fair price shop without assigning any reasons as to his dissatisfaction over the explanation submitted by the petitioner on 07.10.2021, which is against the principle of law 5 VS,J W.P.No.12900 of 2022 laid down in K. Prabhavathi v. State of A.P., represented by its Principal Secretary and others1, it was observed as under: “11. Since the appointing authority acts as a quasi judicial authority, he must give cogent reasons specifying the need for placing the dealer under suspension pending disciplinary enquiry. The mere cryptic order that the report of the inspecting authority reveals a prima-facie case against the petitioner of his committing certain irregularities and thereby violating the Control Order, 2018 is not sufficient to justify suspension. The suspension order shall not just signify the subjective satisfaction of the Officer but it should demonstrate compulsive need for suspension. It should be noted that not all follies of a dealer, invariably require his suspension pending enquiry. Therefore, appointing authority must carefully differentiate between the prima-facie case for holding disciplinary enquiry and a compulsory case which requires not only disciplinary enquiry but also suspension pending enquiry.” 8. Under similar circumstances, when the authorization of a fair price shop dealer was suspended even without considering her explanation, the writ petition (W.P.No.18006 of 2024) preferred by the fair price shop dealer was dismissed on the ground that there is an efficacious alternative remedy by way of a revision before the District Collector. Aggrieved by the same, the fair price shop dealer preferred a writ appeal (W.A.No.122 of 2025) before the Division Bench of this Court, wherein, on examining the facts and circumstances of the said case, the Division Bench observed that as the authorization of the appellant therein was suspended without trying to test the veracity of the explanation offered, the said writ appeal was allowed by setting aside the suspension order passed by the authorities and the matter was remitted back 1 2020 SCC OnLine AP 755 6 VS,J W.P.No.12900 of 2022 to the original primary authority for fresh consideration for conducting proper enquiry. 9. Once the petitioner submits an explanation pursuant to a show cause notice, the concerned authorities must evaluate it thoroughly and shall issue a reasoned order to justify their actions. Without doing so, the 4th respondent has issued the impugned proceedings suspending the authorization of the petitioner, as such, the same has to be set-aside. 10. In view of the same, the proceedings of the 4th respondent in Rc.M.6326/2021, dated 24.03.2022 are hereby set-aside. Further, the respondent authorities are directed to continue the petitioner as fair price shop dealer of shop No.37 of Chandoli village, Pattikonda mandal, Kurnool district, until he is found at fault, in any other instance. 11. In the result, this writ petition is allowed. There shall be no order as to costs. Consequently, Miscellaneous Petitions, if any, pending in this Writ Petition shall stand closed. ____________________ JUSTICE V.SUJATHA 03.11.2025 Gss