APHC010240552025 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) [3333] WEDNESDAY, THE EIGHTH DAY OF OCTOBER TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SMT JUSTICE V.SUJATHA WRIT PETITION NO: 13054/2025 Between: 1. E RAMALAKSHMAMMA, W/O.NAGESH, AGED ABOUT 42 YEARS, OCC FAIR PRICE SHOP DEALER (U/S), DEALER OF FPS NO.1350014, GUDISEGUPPARALLA, H/O.CHENNAMPALLI VILLAGE, TUGGALI MANDAL, KURNOOL DISTRICT. ...PETITIONER AND 1. THE STATE OF AP, REP. BY ITS PRINCIPAL SECRETARY FOOD CIVIL SUPPLIES AND CONSUMER AFFAIRS DEPARTMENT, SECRETARIAT, AMARAVATHI, GUNTUR DISTRICT. 2. THE DISTRICT COLLECTOR CIVIL SUPPLIES, KURNOOL DISTRICT, KURNOOL. 3. THE JOINT COLLECTOR CIVIL SUPPLIES, KURNOOL DISTRICT, KURNOOL. 4. THE REVENUE DIVISIONAL OFFICER, PATTIKONDA DIVISION, KURNOOL DISTRICT, KURNOOL. 5. THE TAHSILDAR, TUGGALI MANDAL, KURNOOL DISTRICT, KURNOOL. ...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, direction, order or orders more particularly one in the 2 VS,J W.P.No.13054 of 2025 nature of Writ of Mandamus declaring the impugned order in Appeal Case No.CS.3/41/2025 dated 23.04.2025, passed by the 3rd respondent dismissing the appeal by confirming the order in Rc.M 3019/2019, dated 19.04.2021, passed by the 4th respondent in cancelling tfje petitioners authorization to run the Fair Price Shop No. 1350014, Gudisegupparalla, H/o.Chennampalli Village, Tuggali Mandal, Pattikonda Division (erstwhile Adoni Division), Kurnool District as illegal, arbitrary, contrary to the provisions of the A.P. Schedule commodities distribution by card system orders, 1983 apart from contrary to the settled law and in violation of principles of natural justice by setting aside the same and consequently direct the respondents to restore the authorization/Licence of the Petitioner Fair Price Shop dealer of Fair Price Shop No.1350014, Gudisegupparalla, H/o.Chennampalli Village, Tuggali Mandal, Kurnool District in the interest of Justice 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 to direct the respondents to continue the petitioner as Fair Price Shop dealer for the shop No. 1350014, Gudisegupparalla, H/o.Chennampalli Village, Tuggali Mandal, PCjrnool District by suspending the impugned order in Appeal Case No.CS.3/41/2025 dated 23.04.2025, passed by the 3rd respondent, pending disposal of the Writ Petition in the interest of justice and 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.13054 of 2025 ORDER: The present Writ Petition is filed under Article 226 of Constitution of India seeking the following relief: <…to a Writ, direction, order or orders more particularly one in the nature of Writ of Mandamus declaring the impugned order in Appeal Case No.CS.3/41/2025 dated 23.04.2025, passed by the 3rd respondent dismissing the appeal by confirming the order in Rc.M 3019/2019, dated 19.04.2021, passed by the 4th respondent in cancelling the petitioner’s authorization to run the Fair Price Shop No. 1350014, Gudisegupparalla, H/o.Chennampalli Village, Tuggali Mandal, Pattikonda Division (erstwhile Adoni Division), Kurnool District as illegal, arbitrary, contrary to the provisions of the A.P. Schedule commodities distribution by card system orders, 1983 apart from contrary to the settled law and in violation of principles of natural justice by setting aside the same and consequently direct the respondents to restore the authorization/Licence of the Petitioner Fair Price Shop dealer of Fair Price Shop No.1350014, Gudisegupparalla, H/o.Chennampalli Village, Tuggali Mandal, Kurnool District.…= 2. The brief facts of the case are as follows: a) The petitioner was appointed as a permanent Fair Price Shop dealer of Shop No.1350014, Gudisegupparala, H/o Chennampalli Village, Tuggali Mandal, Pattikonda Division (erstwhile Adoni Division), Kurnool District, pursuant to the notification issued by the then 4th respondent on 07.04.2015, after following due procedure of law and considering the petitioner’s merit, vide appointment order in Rc.M.554/2015, dated 29.04.2015. Thereafter, the petitioner’s authorization was extended until 2019. b) While the matter being so, in view of the change of Government and due to political reasons under the instigation of local MLA, the Mandal Revenue Inspector, Tuggali is alleged to have inspected the petitioner’s Fair 4 VS,J W.P.No.13054 of 2025 Price Shop on 24.08.2019. During the said inspection, variations in the stock of essential commodities were found, and it was further noticed that the petitioner did not distribute the essential commodities properly to the cardholders and was not residing in the same village. Thereafter, basing on a report submitted by the 5th respondent, a show-cause notice was issued by the 4th respondent on 17.01.2020 calling for an explanation from the petitioner within a period of seven (7) days from the date of receipt of said notice. For which, the petitioner submitted her explanation on 21.01.2020 duly denying the said allegations and requested to revoke the suspension order. In view of the same, as the respondents did not pass any orders, the petitioner was constrained to file W.P.No.17891 of 2020 which was disposed of by this Court with a direction to the 2nd respondent/Collector (Civil Supplies) to consider the petitioner’s explanation and pass appropriate orders within a period of four (4) weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of the order, duly giving an opportunity of personal hearing to the petitioner before passing such order. c) Pursuant to the said order, the petitioner submitted a representation to the 4th respondent duly enclosing the directions passed by this Court in W.P.No.17891 of 2020. On receipt of the same, the 4th respondent issued a Charge Memo framing four charges and directed the petitioner to submit an explanation as to why the petitioner’s Fair Price Shop dealership should not be cancelled for the lapses shown in the said show-cause notice. Further, the petitioner was directed to attend before the R.D.O., Adoni on 11.12.2020 at about 11.00 a.m. 5 VS,J W.P.No.13054 of 2025 d) In view of the fact that there was already a direction in W.P.No.17891 of 2020 directing the respondents to consider the explanation submitted by the petitioner and pass appropriate orders within a period of four (4) weeks, the petitioner was constrained to file Contempt Case No.1461 of 2021 for non- compliance of the said orders. On receipt of the said notice in the contempt case, the 4th respondent, even without conducting any enquiry, straight away passed orders cancelling the petitioner’s authorization by mentioning ante date vide proceedings dated 19.04.2021. Thereafter, on the belief given by respondents No.4 and 5 that he would be continued as Fair Price Shop dealer on a condition that he withdraws the contempt case, the petitioner was constrained to withdraw the Contempt Case No.1461 of 2021. Thereafter, the petitioner approached the 3rd respondent by filing an appeal challenging the orders of the 4th respondent dated 19.04.2021. In the meanwhile, the 4th respondent issued Notification dated 23.12.2024 inviting applications for filling up various vacancies of Fair Price Shop dealers on permanent basis, including the petitioner’s Fair Price Shop. e) Under those circumstances, the petitioner was once again constrained to file W.P.No.412 of 2025. The said writ petition was disposed of vide order dated 28.03.2025 directing the 3rd respondent/Joint Collector, Kurnool to dispose of the appeal preferred by the petitioner within a period of one month from the date of receipt of a copy of the order. However, the 3rd respondent dismissed the appeal preferred by the petitioner confirming the 6 VS,J W.P.No.13054 of 2025 orders passed by the 4th respondent on 19.04.2021. Challenging which, the petitioner filed the present writ petition. 3. A counter affidavit filed by the 3rd respondent reiterating the facts as stated by the petitioner. However, it is stated that in pursuance of the orders dated 28.03.2025 passed in W.P.No.412 of 2025, a notice was issued to the petitioner directing the petitioner to attend personal hearing on 19.04.2025 at 4.00 p.m. before the Collector (C.S.), Kurnool. Accordingly, the petitioner appeared and stated that the variation in Rice & Sugar denoted by the authorities is not correct and as well as the stocks and E-Pos machine were not seized basing upon the variation on the said date, and they are available at the petitioner’s Fair Price shop. Duly considering the explanation given by the petitioner, the 3rd respondent has passed the orders confirming the orders passed by the RDO on 19.04.2021 and as such requested to dismiss the writ petition. 4. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned Assistant Government Pleader for Civil Supplies. 5. On a perusal of the impugned proceedings passed by the 4th respondent vide Rc.M.3019/2019, dated 19.04.2021, it can be observed that admittedly, as stated by the petitioner, no enquiry has been conducted by the respondents except issuing a show-cause notice on 03.12.2020 and receiving the explanation submitted by the petitioner on 11.12.2020. 7 VS,J W.P.No.13054 of 2025 6. Though the charges framed against the petitioner are that there is a variation of 4.94 quintals of rice and sugar 0.07 kgs less in the ground balance; that the petitioner distributed essential commodities to the cardholders in less weightage; the petitioner was not maintaining timings prescribed by the Government; and the petitioner was not residing in the village, the respondents failed to conduct any enquiry by examining the respective cardholders to prove that the petitioner was distributing essential commodities to the cardholders in less weightage and the villagers to prove that the petitioner was not residing in the said village. 7. The cancellation orders are passed by the 4th respondent basing upon the available records and on the inspection report of the 5th respondent, as well as the statement of the petitioner’s father-in-law. Nowhere in the cancellation order it has been mentioned as to the statements recorded by the cardholders or the names of the cardholders whose statements were recorded during the course of enquiry. The said order has been confirmed by the 3rd respondent in a mechanical manner without assigning any proper reasons for non-interference with the said order. 8. Considering the above facts and circumstances, this Court is of the opinion that the order passed by the 4th respondent dated 19.04.2021 cancelling the petitioner’s authorization as well as the consequential appellate order passed by the 3rd respondent dated 23.04.2025 are unsustainable and are accordingly liable to be set aside. 8 VS,J W.P.No.13054 of 2025 9. Accordingly, the Writ Petition is allowed. The cancellation proceedings in Rc.M.3019/2019 dated 19.04.2021 issued by the 4th respondent as well as the consequential appellate order passed by the 3rd respondent dated 23.04.2025 are hereby set aside. The matter is remanded to the 4th respondent for conducting a fresh enquiry, after duly issuing notice to the petitioner, affording a personal hearing and examining the relevant cardholders. The entire process shall be completed within a period of two (2) months from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. There shall be no order as to costs. Consequently, Miscellaneous Petitions, if any, pending shall stand closed. ______________________ JUSTICE V.SUJATHA Date: 08.10.2025 KGR