APHC010586422025 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) [3333] TUESDAY, THE FOURTH DAY OF NOVEMBER TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SMT JUSTICE V.SUJATHA WRIT PETITION NO: 30403/2025 Between: 1. MOTAPOTHULA SALOMI, D/O. LATE M. SALMAN, AGED ABOUT 37 YEARS, OCC FAIR PRICE SHOP DEALER, R/O. 10/123,MARIYAPURAM, RAVINDRANAGAR, KADAPA, KADAPA DISTRICT ...PETITIONER AND 1. THE STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH, REP.BY ITS PRINCIPAL SECRETARY, CIVIL SUPPLIES DEPARTMENT, SECRETARIAT, VELAGAPUDI, GUNTUR DISTRICT. 2. THE JOINT COLLECTOR CIVIL SUPPLIES, KADAPA, KADAPA DISTRICT. 3. THE REVENUE DIVISIONAL OFFICER, KADAPA DIVISION, KADAPA DISTRICT. 4. THE TAHSILDAR, KADAPA MANDAL, KADAPA 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 or order or direction more particularly one in the nature of writ of Mandamus, declaring the action of the 3rd respondent in issuing proceedings Ref.No.F/1216/2025 dated 25.10.2025 suspending the 2 VS,J W.P.No.30403 of 2025 petitioner's authorization of Fair Price Shop No. 1131111 of Mariyapuram Village, Kadapa Mandal, Kadapa District as illegal arbitrary and violative of principles of natural justice and consequently direct the 3rd respondent to continue the petitioner as Dealer of F P Shop No.1131111 of Mariyapuram Village, Kadapa Mandal, Kadapa District 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 suspend the proceedings vide Ref.No.F/1216/2025 dated: 25.10.2025 and direct the Respondents 3 and 4 to release Essential Commodities and to allow the petitioner to function as Fair Price Shop Dealer of No. 1131 111 of Mariyapuram Village, Kadapa Mandal, Kadapa District by regularly supplying essential commodities pending disposal of the above writ petition Counsel for the Petitioner: 1. BUGULU SREETEJA Counsel for the Respondent(S): 1. BUGULU SREETEJA Counsel for the Respondent(S): 1. GP FOR CIVIL SUPPLIES The Court made the following: 3 VS,J W.P.No.30403 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 a writ or order or direction more particularly one in the nature of writ of Mandamus, declaring the action of the 3rd respondent in issuing proceedings Ref.No.F/1216/2025 dated 25.10.2025 suspending the petitioner's authorization of Fair Price Shop No. 1131111 of Mariyapuram Village, Kadapa Mandal, Kadapa District as illegal arbitrary and violative of principles of natural justice and consequently direct the 3rd respondent to continue the petitioner as Dealer of F.P.Shop No.1131111 of Mariyapuram Village, Kadapa Mandal, Kadapa District ….” 2. The brief facts of the case are as follows: a) Initially, the petitioner’s mother was appointed as a permanent Fair Price Shop dealer for Shop No.1131111of Mariyapuram Village, Kadapa Mandal, Kadapa District. After demise of the petitioner’s mother, the petitioner was appointed on compassionate grounds in the year 2015 vide Authorization No.473/2015. Thereafter, the petitioner’s authorization has been renewed from to time and is valid up to 31.03.2026. Since the date of her appointment, the petitioner has been distributing essential commodities to the cardholders without any complaint either from the cardholders or from the concerned authorities. b) While the things stood thus, due to a change in the Government and due to political pressure, the respondents are bent upon to dislodge all the fair 4 VS,J W.P.No.30403 of 2025 price shop dealers in Kadapa District. In that process, the staff of the 4th respondent along with local political followers, visited the petitioner’s shop on 10.10.2025 at about 10.55 a.m., and found certain variations in the stock to an extent of + 209 kgs of PDS rice and + 16 kgs of Jowar. c) A panchanama was prepared in the presence of mediators, and a report was submitted by the Tahsildar/4th respondent on 15.10.2025 to the 3rd respondent. Basing upon the said report, the 4th respondent passed the impugned order dated 25.10.2025, placing the petitioner’s authorization under suspension. d) The petitioner has challenged the said suspension order on the ground that it was passed without issuance of any show-cause notice or affording an opportunity of explanation, and also on the ground that there exists a discrepancy in the variation of Jowar mentioned in the Tahsildar’s report dated 15.10.2025 and in the impugned proceedings dated 25.10.2025. As per the Tahsildar’s report, the total ground balance of Jowar was 510 kgs, out of which the petitioner had distributed 387 kgs, and in such a case the variation would be 403 kgs and hence the excess balance would be only 16 kgs only, as rightly stated in the Tahsildar’s report. However, in the impugned proceedings dated 25.10.2025, the said variation was erroneously shown as 104.13%, which is factually incorrect. 5 VS,J W.P.No.30403 of 2025 3. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned Assistant Government Pleader for Civil Supplies. 4. On a perusal of the impugned proceedings, it can be observed that admittedly there is a discrepancy in the variation of Jowar as recorded in the Tahsildar’s report dated 15.10.2025 and in the impugned proceedings dated 25.10.2025. Further, it is also admitted fact that the petitioner’s authorization was placed under suspension without issuance of any show-cause notice and without calling for an explanation from the petitioner and on the other hand, it can also be observed that no reasoning has been assigned by the respondents, while passing the impugned orders which is in violation of the principles of natural justice. 5. In view of the same, the impugned proceedings dated 25.10.2025 passed by the 3rd respondent are liable to be set aside. 6. Accordingly, the Writ Petition is allowed, setting aside the impugned proceedings dated 25.10.2025 passed by the 3rd respondent. However, the respondents are at liberty to initiate appropriate action against the petitioner, if so warranted, based on the inspection conducted on 10.10.2025, in accordance with the provisions of the Andhra Pradesh State Targeted Public Distribution System (Control) Order, 2018, after following due process of law. The respondents are further directed to supply essential commodities to the 6 VS,J W.P.No.30403 of 2025 petitioner for distribution to the cardholders till the disciplinary proceedings, if any, are finally concluded. As a sequel, miscellaneous applications, pending, if any, shall also stand closed. ____________________ JUSTICE V.SUJATHA Date : 04.11.2025. KGR