1 APHC010445342021 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) [3333] WEDNESDAY, THE NINETEENTH DAY OF NOVEMBER TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SMT JUSTICE V.SUJATHA WRIT PETITION NO: 1005/2021 Between: 1. KUM DAGGULA GANGAYAMMA, D/O NAGI REDDY, AGED ABOUT . ABOVE 41 YEARS, FAIR PRICE SHOP DEALER, F.P.SHOP NO11716547, RIO. KOTANEMALIPURVILLAGE, RAJUPALEM MANDAL, GUNTUR DISTRICT. ...PETITIONER AND 1. STATE OF AP, REP. BY ITS SECRETARY, CONSUMER AFFAIRS AND CIVIL SUPPLIES DEPARTMENT, SECRETARIAT BUILDINGS, VELAGAPUDI, AMARAVATHI, GUNTUR DISTRICT. 2. THE JOINT COLLECTOR AND ADDL DIST MAGISTRATE CS, GUNTUR, GUNTUR DISTRICT. 3. THE REVENUE DIVISIONAL OFFICER, GUNTUR, GUNTUR DISTRICT. 4. THE TAHSILDAR, RAJUPALEM MANDAL, GUNTUR 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 to issue a. writ order or direction, more particularly one in the nature of writ of Mandamus, declaring the action of the 2nd respondent in not directing the 4th respondent to allot the stock as per the regular allotment to the petitioner's FP Shop No. 6.71607 of Kotanemalipuri Village, Rajulapalem 2 Mandal, Guntur District the representations of the petitioner dated 12.08.2020 and 03.10.2020 is illegal arbitrary and violation of principles of natural justice consequently direct the 2nd respondent to direct the 4th respondent to allot the essential commodities as per the regular allotment to the petitioners F.P. Shop and also balance of the Essential commodities which was due to the petitioners F.P. Shop No. 0716007 of Kotanemalipuri Village, Rajulapalem Mandal, Guntur District and to pass. WRIT PETITION.NO.27012 of 2021 Between: 1. KUM. DAGGULA GANGAYAMMA,, AGED ABOUT ABOVE 40 YEARS, FAIR PRICE SHOP DEALER, F.P.SHOP NO.0716007, R/O. KOTANEMALIPURI RAJUPALEM MANDAL, GUNTUR DISTRICT. ...PETITIONER AND 1. THE STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH, REP. BY ITS SECRETARY, CONSUMER AFFAIRS AND CIVIL SUPPLIES DEPARTMENT, SECRETARIAT BUILDINGS, VELAGAPUDI, AMARAVATHI, GUNTUR DISTRICT. 2. THE REVENUE DIVISIONAL OFFICER, GUNTUR, GUNTUR DISTRICT. 3. THE TAHSILDAR, RAJUPALEM MANDAL, GUNTUR 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 to issue a writ order or direction, more particularly one in the nature of writ of Mandamus, declaring the action of the 2nd and 3rd respondent in not supplying the essential commodities to the petitioner Fair Price Shop No. No.0716007 of Kotanemalipuri Village, Rajupalem Mandal, Guntur District without there being any suspension or cancellation of authorization is illegal, arbitrary and violation of principals of natural justice and consequently direct 2nd and 3rd respondent to supply the essential commodities to the petitioner 3 Fair Price Shop No. No.0716007 of Kotanemalipuri Village, Rajupalem Mandal, Guntur District and to pass Counsel for the Petitioner: 1. K SRINIVAS Counsel for the Respondent(S): 1. GP FOR CIVIL SUPPLIES 4 The Court made the following: COMMON ORDER : 1. Since the issue involved in both the writ petitions is one and the same, they are being disposed of by this common order. 2. W.P.No.1005 of 2021 is filed challenging the action of the 2nd respondent-Joint Collector (Civil Supplies), Guntur in not directing the 4th respondent-Tahsildar, Rajupalem Mandal, to allot stock to the petitioner’s fair prince shop as per the regular allotment. 3. W.P.No.27012 of 2021 is filed aggrieved by the action of the respondents 2 and 3 in not supplying the essential commodities to the petitioner’s fair price shop. 4. The petitioner was appointed as a fair price shop dealer bearing Shop No.0726007 of Kotanemalipuri village, Rajupalem Mandal, Guntur District. Since the date of appointment, the petitioner was distributing essential commodities to the cardholders without any remark. On 12.06.2020, the staff of the District Administration along with Village Revenue Officer of Kotenemalipuri village, Rajupalem Mandal, visited the shop of the petitioner and found certain irregularities in distribution of essential commodities and seized certain quantity of essential commodities. On the basis of Panchanama, the 3rd respondent-Revenue Divisional Officer, Guntur, recommended the 2nd respondent-Joint Collector, Guntur, for initiation of proceedings under Section 6-A of the 5 Essential Commodities Act, 1955. However, the 2nd respondent cancelled the authorization of the petitioner’s fair price shop vide his proceedings in Rc.No.262/2021-S8, dated 18.06.2020. Further, challenging the action of the respondents in not supplying the essential commodities, in spite of several representations made by the petitioner for allotment of stock, the petitioner filed W.P.No.10327 of 2020. In the said writ petition, this court, vide its order dated 22.06.2020, directed the 2nd respondent-Joint Collector (Civil Supplies) to complete the disciplinary proceedings within a period of two months from the date of receipt of the copy and till such time, the authorization of the petitioner is permitted to be continued. 5. While the things stood thus, on 02.11.2021, the Vigilance and Enforcement staff inspected the shop of the petitioner and found certain irregularities in distribution of essential commodities and seized the available stock along with E-pass and electronic weighing machine and recommended the Joint Collector, Guntur-II for initiation of 6-A proceedings. However, the 2nd respondent-Joint Collector, Guntur, cancelled the authorization of the petitioner, vide his proceedings in Rc.No.1575/2021-B, dated 19.06.2021. Aggrieved by the said proceedings, the petitioner filed W.P.No.12700 of 2021, wherein an interim direction was granted suspending the proceedings of the 2nd respondent, and accordingly, the petitioner is continued as a fair price shop dealer. Aggrieved by the action of the respondents in not supplying the essential 6 commodities to the petitioner’s fair price shop, W.P.No.27012 of 2021 came to be filed. 6. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned Assistant Government Pleader for Civil Supplies. 7. The 3rd respondent-Revenue Divisional Officer, Sattenappali, filed his counter-affidavit, inter alia, contending that in obedience to the orders passed in W.P.No.10327 of 2020, the 2nd respondent issued proceedings in Rc.No.262/2020-S8, dated 04.07.2020 permitting the petitioner for lifting and distribution of stocks to the cardholders from the month of July, 2020 till completion of enquiry pending against her, while directing the 4th respondent and Civil Supplies Deputy Tahsildar, Sattenepalli to handover e-POS device, weighing scale and closing balance stocks available to the petitioner. However, the petitioner made several representations for deletion of stocks from the e-POS device and accordingly, the petitioner was permitted for lifting the stocks. In fact, the petitioner diverted the stocks into black-market for her personal gain causing huge loss to the Government under subsidy. Further, the Collector (CS), Palnadu, directed a detailed report to be submitted regarding the discrepancies in closing the stock and disciplinary action on the petitioner, and accordingly, the 4th respondent-Tahsildar, submitted a detailed report about pendency of several 6-A cases and the writ petitions involving unrecovered stock variation of 1889.17 quintals as against the allotment of 278.20 quintals for 7 March, 2025, due to which, essential commodities were not released from November, 2020 to March, 2025. However, the 2nd respondent issued a recovery notice as well as distrait order, but the petitioner refused to receive the said two notices. While so, basing on the complaints received from the cardholders, the authorization of the petitioner was cancelled vide proceedings in Rc.No.1232/2025-C, dated 28.04.2025. 8. As seen from the averments of the counter affidavit of the 3rd respondent, it appears that during pendency of the present writ petitions, the authorization of the petitioner’s fair price shop was cancelled vide Rc.No.1232/2025-C, dated 22.04.2025. Further, basing on the detailed report of the 4th respondent, since there is huge revenue loss nearly to a tune of Rs.13,65,170/-, on account of the petitioner in diverting the stocks into black market, the 2nd respondent issued a recovery notice and a distrait order, challenging of which, the petitioner filed W.P.No.18618 of 2025, wherein an interim suspension of recovery was granted. In obedience to the said orders, no further action has been taken on the recovery of the alleged amount and the said writ petition is pending consideration. 9. In view of the above facts and circumstances of the case, since the authorization of the petitioner was already cancelled vide Rc.No.1232/2025-C, dated 22.04.2025, during pendency of these writ 8 petitions, this court is of the view that nothing further remains to be adjudicated in these writ petitions. 10. Accordingly, the writ petitions are closed, leaving it open to the petitioner to challenge the proceedings in Rc.No.1232/2025-C, dated 22.04.2025. There shall be no order as to costs. As a sequel thereto, interlocutory applications pending, if any in the Writ Petition, shall also stand closed. _____________ V. SUJATHA, J Date: 19.11.2025 Ksn/Cmk 9 HONOURABLE SMT JUSTICE V.SUJATHA W.P.No.1005 & 27012 of 2021 19th November, 2025 Ksn/Cmk