Research › Search › Judgment

High Court of Andhra Pradesh · body

2025 DAILYLAW 4551 (AP)

PABBISETTY VENUGOPAL v. THE STATE OF AP

WP/1773/2025 · 2025-04-03

Sumathi Jagadam

body2025

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

APHC010034522025 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) [3459] THURSDAY, THE THIRD DAY OF APRIL TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SMT JUSTICE SUMATHI JAGADAM WRIT PETITION NO: 1773/2025 Between: Pabbisetty Venugopal ...PETITIONER AND The State of AP and others ...RESPONDENT(S) Counsel for the Petitioner: 1. Alapati Vivekananda Counsel for the Respondent(S): 1. GP FOR CIVIL SUPPLIES The Court made the following: 2 ORDER: The present writ petition is 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 Mandamus, declaring the action of 4th Respondent/R.D.O, Ongole, who suspended the authorization of the petitioner through her proceedings, dated 10-1-2025 in Rc.No.1/3647/2024, is wholly illegal, arbitrary and opposed to the spirit of Judgments of this Hon'ble High Court and also mandatory provisions of Control Orders and also violate of principals of natural justice and without jurisdiction and set- aside the proceedings of 4th respondent-R.D.O., Ongole, dt.10- 1-2025 in Rc.No.1/3647/2024 and consequently to direct the respondents to continue the petitioner as FP Shop dealer. Shop No 0848012 of Alakurapadu Village, Tangutur Mandal, Prakasam District and pass such other order or orders as this Hon’ble Court may deem fit and proper in the circumstances of the case.” 2. The case of the petitioner is that the petitioner was appointed as a fair price shop dealer of Alakurapadu Village, Tangutur Mandal, Ongole Division. Show cause notice dated 20.12.2024 was issued, based on the report submitted by the 5th respondent. The petitioner has submitted his explanation on 26.12.2024. The 4th respondent, without considering the explanation, with reference to the charges framed against the petitioner, has suspended the authorization vide proceedings, dated 10.01.2025, which is in violation of the principles of natural justice. 3. Learned Assistant Government Pleader for Civil Supplies, on written instructions, submits that vide notice, dated 01.04.2025, the 3 petitioner was directed to appear before the 4th respondent on 07.04.2025, and after completion of the enquiry, necessary action will be taken as per Civil Supplies Rules. 4. In view of the aforesaid submission, without going into merits of the case, this Court is inclined to dispose of the writ petition directing the 4th respondent to consider the explanation submitted by the petitioner and pass appropriate orders, within a period of two weeks, after affording an opportunity of hearing to the petitioner. Till such time, the respondents are directed to continue the petitioner as a dealer of fair price shop No.0848012 of Alakurapadu Village, Tangutur Mandal, Prakasam District. 5. With the above observations, the Writ Petition is disposed of. There shall be no order as to costs. As a sequel, miscellaneous petitions pending, if any, shall stand closed. ______________________________ SMT JUSTICE SUMATHI JAGADAM Date : 03.04.2025 SPP 4 THE HONOURABLE SMT JUSTICE SUMATHI JAGADAM WRIT PETITION NO.1773 of 2025 Date : 03.04.2025 SPP