APHC010458852025 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH (Special Original Jurisdiction) TUESDAY,THE ELEVENTH DAY OF NOVEMBER TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE THE HONOURABLE SMT JUSTICE V.SUJATHA WRIT PETITION NO: 23953/2025 Between: 1. A. NAGANNA,, S/O. A. SUBBA RAYUDU, AGED ABOUT 39 YEARS, OCC FAIR PRICE SHOP DEALER, R/O. H.NO. 3 KATIKAVANIKUNTA VILLAGE, BANGANAPALLI MANDAL, NANDYAL DISTRICT 1. THE STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH, REP. BY ITS PRINCIPAL SECRETARY, CONSUMER AFFAIRS, FOOD AND CIVIL SUPPLIES, SECRETARIAT, VELAGAPUDI, GUNTUR DISTRICT 2. THE COLLECTOR CS, NANDYAL DISTRICT, NANDYAL 3. THE REVENUE DIVISIONAL OFFICER, DHONE, NANDYAL DISTRICT 4. THE TAHSILDHAR, BANAGANAPALLI MANDAL, NANDY DISTRICT 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 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.D.CS.633/2025, dated 29.08.2025, in suspending the authorization of the petitioner Katikavanikunta Village, Banganapalli Mandal, Nandyal District basing on the 6-A report issued by the 4th respondent, as illegal, arbitrary and in flagrant IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) TUESDAY,THE ELEVENTH DAY OF NOVEMBER TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SMT JUSTICE V.SUJATHA WRIT PETITION NO: 23953/2025 A. NAGANNA,, S/O. A. SUBBA RAYUDU, AGED ABOUT 39 YEARS, OCC FAIR PRICE SHOP DEALER, R/O. H.NO. 3 KATIKAVANIKUNTA VILLAGE, BANGANAPALLI MANDAL, NANDYAL ...PETITIONER AND THE STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH, REP. BY ITS PRINCIPAL SECRETARY, CONSUMER AFFAIRS, FOOD AND CIVIL SUPPLIES, SECRETARIAT, VELAGAPUDI, GUNTUR DISTRICT THE COLLECTOR CS, NANDYAL DISTRICT, NANDYAL THE REVENUE DIVISIONAL OFFICER, DHONE, NANDYAL DISTRICT THE TAHSILDHAR, BANAGANAPALLI MANDAL, NANDY ...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 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.D.CS.633/2025, dated 29.08.2025, in suspending the authorization of the petitioner fair price Shop No. 1344014 of Katikavanikunta Village, Banganapalli Mandal, Nandyal District basing on the A report issued by the 4th respondent, as illegal, arbitrary and in flagrant IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH [3333] A. NAGANNA,, S/O. A. SUBBA RAYUDU, AGED ABOUT 39 YEARS, OCC FAIR PRICE SHOP DEALER, R/O. H.NO. 3-68, KATIKAVANIKUNTA VILLAGE, BANGANAPALLI MANDAL, NANDYAL ...PETITIONER THE STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH, REP. BY ITS PRINCIPAL SECRETARY, CONSUMER AFFAIRS, FOOD AND CIVIL SUPPLIES, THE REVENUE DIVISIONAL OFFICER, DHONE, NANDYAL DISTRICT THE TAHSILDHAR, BANAGANAPALLI MANDAL, NANDYAL ...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 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.D.CS.633/2025, dated 29.08.2025, in fair price Shop No. 1344014 of Katikavanikunta Village, Banganapalli Mandal, Nandyal District basing on the A report issued by the 4th respondent, as illegal, arbitrary and in flagrant 2 VS,J W.P.No.23953 of 2025 disregard to law and consequently set aside the aforesaid impugned orders of the 3rd respondent 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. 1344014 of Katikavanikunta Village, Banganapalli Mandal, Nandyal District by suspending the impugned orders of the 3rd respondent in Re.No.D.CS.633/2025, dated 29.08.2025, pending disposal of the above writ petition 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.23953 of 2025 HONOURABLE SMT. JUSTICE V.SUJATHA WRIT PETITION No.23953 of 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.D.CS.633/2025, dated.29.08.2025 in suspending the authorization of the petitioner fair price Shop No. 1344014 of Katikavanikunta 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 is appointed as permanent Fair Price Shop dealer for shop No.1344014 of Katikavanikunta village, Banganapalli Mandal, Nandyal District in pursuance of the appointment orders dated 10.04.2010 issued by the 3rd respondent. The petitioners authorization has been extended from time to time and subsisting till 31.03.2027. 3. While the things stood thus, basing on the report submitted by the Tahsildar dated 26.06.2025, alleging that there was a variation of (+) 1.5 quintals of PDS rice which is beyond as permissible limit 1.5 % variation, the 3rd respondent issued a show cause notice dated 22.07.2025 calling for the explanation from the petitioner and in pursuance of which the petitioner submitted explanation on 07.08.2025. The grievance of the petitioner in the present writ petition is that, the 3rd respondent even without considering the 4 VS,J W.P.No.23953 of 2025 explanation given by the petitioner, suspended the petitioner’s authorization vide impugned order dated 29.08.2025. 4. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned Assistant Government Pleader for Civil Supplies. 5. The 3rd respondent filed detailed counter re-iterating the facts as stated in the petition affidavit. However, it is said that the petitioner has submitted his explanation on 07.08.2025 after 14 days of issuance of the show cause notice, though the show cause notice was acknowledged by the petitioner on 25.07.2025 itself. Even otherwise in the said explanation the petitioner has simply stated that he is working as fair price shop dealer in the said shop since 2010 without any adverse complaints against him and hence requested to continue him as fair shop dealer but had not assigned any reasons as to the said variation found in his shop during the course of inspection. 6. On perusal of the show cause notice dated 22.07.2025, it can be observed that only one charge has been framed against the petitioner with regard to the variation of (+) 1.5 quintals of fortified rice (PDS rice) found excess in the ground balance and also that the variation of the rice above permissible limit i.e., 1.5 % (under clause 29 (a) of A.P.S.T.P.D.S (Control) Order, 2018. Though, the petitioner has submitted an explanation on 08.08.2025, the petitioner failed to explain with regard to the variation found in his shop during the course of inspection, but has simply stated that the petitioner has been running the fair price shop since 2010 without any adverse 5 VS,J W.P.No.23953 of 2025 remarks. As the petitioner has not submitted any satisfactory explanation to the charge framed against the petitioner, the 3rd respondent vide impugned proceedings dated 29.08.2025 suspended the petitioner authorization pending enquiry on the ground that the variation of the PDS rice found in the petitioner shop is beyond the permissible limit as per clause 29 under A.P.S.T.P.D.S (Control) Order, 2018. 7. In view of the same, this Court is not inclined to interfere with the concerned order impugned in the present Writ Petition. However, as the said impugned proceedings dated 29.08.2025 suspending the authorization is pending enquiry, there shall be a direction to the 3rd respondent to complete enquiry as expeditiously as possible preferably within 14 days, from the date of receipt of the copy of this order. 8. Accordingly, the writ petition is disposed of. No costs. As a sequel, miscellaneous applications, pending, if any, shall also stand closed. ____________________ JUSTICE V.SUJATHA Date :11.11.2025 GRL 6 VS,J W.P.No.23953 of 2025 244 THE HONOURABLE SMT JUSTICE V.SUJATHA WRIT PETITION NO: 23953 of 2025 Date :11.11.2025 GRL