1 VS,J W.P.No.36542 of 2025 APHC010705802025 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) [3333] WEDNESDAY,THE THIRTY FIRST DAY OF DECEMBER TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SMT JUSTICE V.SUJATHA WRIT PETITION NO: 36542/2025 Between: 1. S K SOMLA NAIK, S/O. KISE NAIK, AGED ABOUT 70 YEARS, OCC FAIR PRICE SHOP DEALER, R/O. H.NO. 5-4, KALE NAYAK THANDA, PASUPULA VILLAGE, BANGANAPALLI MANDAL, NANDYAL DISTRICT ...PETITIONER AND 1. THE STATE OF AP, REP. BY ITS PRINCIPAL SECRETARY, CONSUMER AFFAIRS, FOOD AND CIVIL SUPPLIES, SECRETARIAT, VELAGAPUDI, GUNTUR DISTRICT-522238 2. THE COLLECTOR CS, NANDYAL DISTRICT, NANDYAL-518501 3. THE REVENUE DIVISIONAL OFFICER, DHONE, NANDYAL DISTRICT- 518222 4. THE TAHSILDHAR, BANAGANAPALLI MANDAL, NANDYAL DISTRICT- 518124 ...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 an appropriate writ, order or direction more particularly one in the nature of Writ of Mandamus, declaring the impugned orders of the 3rd respondent vide Rc.No.CS.630/2025, dated 06.12.2025, in suspending the 2 VS,J W.P.No.36542 of 2025 authorization of the petitioner fair price Shop No. 1344018 of Pasupula Village, Banganapalli Mandal, Nandyal District basing on the 6-A report issued by the 4th respondent, as illegal, arbitrary and in flagrant disregard to law and consequently set aside the aforesaid impugned orders of the 3rd respondent and pass IA NO: 1 OF 2025 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 direct the respondents to continue the petitioner as fair price shop dealer to Shop No. 1344018 of Pasupula Village, Banganapalli Mandal, Nandyal District by suspending the impugned orders of the 3rd respondent in Rc.No.CS.630/2025, dated 06.12.2025, pending disposal of the above writ petition and pass Counsel for the Petitioner: 1. K NAGA PHANINDRA Counsel for the Respondent(S): 1. GP FOR CIVIL SUPPLIES The Court made the following: 3 VS,J W.P.No.36542 of 2025 THE HONOURABLE SMT JUSTICE V.SUJATHA WRIT PETITION NO: 36542/2025 ORDER:- The present Writ Petition came to be 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 impugned orders of the 3rd respondent vide Rc.No.CS.630/2025, dated 06.12.2025, in suspending the authorization of the petitioner fair price Shop No. 1344018 of Pasupula Village, Banganapalli Mandal, Nandyal District basing on the 6-A report issued by the 4th respondent, as illegal, arbitrary and in flagrant disregard to law and consequently set aside the aforesaid impugned orders of the 3rd respondent.” 2. The petitioner was initially appointed as a permanent Fair Price Shop dealer for Shop No.1344018 of Pasupula Village, Banganapalli Mandal, Nandyal District in the year 1986 and his authorization has been renewed from time to time and is subsisting till 31.03.2027. 3. While the things stood thus, on 26.06.2025, a surprise check was conducted at the petitioner’s Fair Price Shop by the Village Revenue Officer, Pasupula, along with other revenue officials, alleging variation of (-) 2.58 quintals of PDS rice, which is beyond 1.5% variation. Basing on a report submitted by the 4th respondent, the 3rd respondent issued a show cause notice on 22.07.2025 calling for an explanation from the petitioner by duly framing a single charge 4 VS,J W.P.No.36542 of 2025 against the petitioner. For which, the petitioner submitted an explanation on 07.08.2025. In spite of the same, as the 3rd respondent passed orders dated 29.08.2025 placing the petitioner’s authorization under suspension pending enquiry, without passing any speaking orders. The petitioner was constrained to file W.P.No.24191 of 2025. The said writ petition was allowed on 10.09.2025, setting aside the suspension order dated 29.08.2025 and remanding the matter to the 3rd respondent for fresh consideration. Thereafter, the 3rd respondent again issued a show cause notice calling for an explanation, to which the petitioner submitted a further explanation on 19.11.2025. 4. The grievance of the petitioner in the present writ petition is that, though he submitted an explanation for the second time, the 3rd respondent, without considering the explanation submitted by the petitioner that he was receiving less quantity from the MLS point, suspended the petitioner’s authorization pending enquiry vide the impugned proceedings dated 06.12.2025. 5. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned Assistant Government Pleader for Civil Supplies appearing for the respondents. 6. Having perused the impugned proceedings, it can be observed that the petitioner’s authorization was placed under suspension pending enquiry on the ground that the petitioner submitted a different explanation after the matter was remanded to the 3rd respondent pursuant to the orders passed by this Court in 5 VS,J W.P.No.36542 of 2025 W.P.No.24191 of 2025. As there is a variation in the explanation submitted by the petitioner, the 3rd respondent has specifically stated that the explanation submitted by the petitioner is an afterthought with a malafide intention. However, as the impugned proceedings relate only to suspension pending enquiry, instead of going into merits of the case, this Court deems it appropriate to direct the 3rd respondent to complete the enquiry within a period of four (04) weeks. 6. Accordingly, the Writ Petition is disposed of directing the 3rd respondent to complete the enquiry within a period of four (04) weeks. No costs. As a sequel, miscellaneous applications, pending, if any, shall also stand closed. ____________________ JUSTICE V.SUJATHA Date :31.12.2025 JLV 6 VS,J W.P.No.36542 of 2025 219 THE HONOURABLE SMT JUSTICE V.SUJATHA WRIT PETITION NO: 36542/2025 Date :31.12.2025 JLV