DIVYA MODERN RICE MILL v. THE STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH
WP/21856/2025 · 2025-11-23
Gannamaneni Ramakrishna Prasad
Public Interest Litigationbody2025
DailyLaw.ai
[ 2025 DAILYLAW 52090 (AP) · dailylaw.ai ]
DailyLaw.ai
[ 2025 DAILYLAW 52090 (AP) · dailylaw.ai ]
Judgment text
Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.
APHC010418692025
IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) [3328] MONDAY, THE TWENTY FOURTH DAY OF NOVEMBER TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE GANNAMANENI RAMAKRISHNA PRASAD WRIT PETITION NO: 21856/2025 Between:
1. DIVYA MODERN RICE MILL, ADDRESS KOTIPALLI VILLAGE, PONDURU MANDAL REP. BY ITS REGISTERED PROPRIETOR G.
HARINDRA KUMAR, S/O. ASIRINAIDU AGED ABOUT 41 YEARS, R/O. 1-86, MAIN STREET MAJJILIPETA, SRIKAKULAM, ANDHRA PRADESH
...PETITIONER AND
1. THE STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH, REP. BY ITS PRINCIPAL SECRETARY, FOOD, CIVIL SUPPLIES AND CONSUMER AFFAIRS DEPARTMENT
SECRETARIAT BUILDINGS, VELAGAPUDI, AMARAVATI. 2. THE AP CIVIL SUPPLIES CORPORATION LIMITED, REP. BY ITS VICE CHAIRMAN AND MANAGING DIRECTOR SRI SAI TOWERS, ASHOK NAGAR, KANURU, VIJAYAWADA - 520007. 3. THE JOINT COLLECTOR AND EXOFFICIO EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR, AP CIVIL SUPPLIES CORPORATION LTD. SRIKAKULAM, SRIKAKULAM DISTRICT. 4. THE DISTRICT CIVIL SUPPLIES MANAGER, THE AP CIVIL SUPPLIES CORPORATION LIMITED SRIKAKULAM, SRIKAKULAM DISTRICT. 5. THE UNION BANK OF INDIA, REP. BY ITS BRANCH MANAGER
2
BALAGA BRANCH PALAKONDA ROAD, BALAGA, SRIKAKULAM. ...RESPONDENT(S): Counsel for the Petitioner:
1. PILLIX LAW FIRM Counsel for the Respondent(S):
1. GP FOR CIVIL SUPPLIES The Court made the following:
ORAL ORDER:
Heard Sri P. Aditya Harsha Vardha, learned counsel representing M/s. Pillix Law Firm for the Writ Petitioner, Sri T.V. Ananda Rao, learned Assistant Governmetn Pleader for Civil Supplies and Sri Md. Saleem, learned Standing Counsel for Civil Supplies Corporation Limited. 2. Sri P. Aditya Harsha Vardha, learned Counsel representing M/s. Pillix Law Firm, for the Writ Petitioner, has placed on record G.O.Ms.No. 11, Consumer Affairs, Food & Civil Supplies (CS.I) Department, dated
24.09.2024. He submits that Para 28 of the said G.O. indicates the provision for filing an Appeal before the District Collector. Para 28 of the said G.O. reads as under:
“28. Any miller aggrieved by the orders of the Joint Collector & Ex-Officio Executive Director, APSCSCL against non-delivery of Custom Milling Rice (CMR) deliveries, or delay in delivery of Custom Milling Rice (CMR) by the defaulting Millers, consequent to Bank Guarantee (BG) invocation and levy of penalty towards the loss caused, may prefer an appeal to the District Collector, within thirty (30) days from the date of receipt of orders of the Joint Collector & Ex-Officio Executive Director, APSCSCL.”
3.
Sri P. Aditya Harsha Vardha, learned Counsel representing M/s. Pillix Law Firm, learned Counsel for the Writ Petitioner, on Instructions, seeks to withdraw this Writ Petition with liberty to avail the Appeal provision as
3
prescribed in Para 28 of the said G.O., dated 24.09.2024. He would submit that 30 days are prescribed for filing an Appeal and the present Writ Petition has been filed within the 30-day period. He therefore requests that the Petitioner would require some extra time to approach the Appellate Authority. This Court finds the request as being reasonable. 4. Accordingly, this Writ Petition is dismissed as withdrawn with liberty to file an Appeal in terms of Para 28 of G.O.Ms.No.11, Consumer Affairs, Food & Civil Supplies (CS.I) Department, dated 24.09.2024. No order as to costs. 5. It transpires from the record that the Impugned Order passed by the Authority dated 28.06.2025 was served on the Petitioner on 08.07.2025, and the Petitioner has filed the Writ Petition on 07.08.2025. In this view of the matter, two weeks’ additional time is granted to the Petitioner to prefer an Appeal as indicated above. 6. There shall be a direction to the Appellate Authority to reckon the period of two weeks from the date of uploading of the Order of this Court on the website of this Court. 7. Needless to state, the Authority shall dispose of the Appeal by adhering to the Principles of Natural justice. 8. Interlocutory Applications, if any, stand closed in terms of this
order.
_________________________________ GANNAMANENIRAMAKRISHNA PRASAD, J
Dt: 24.11.2025 DSV
4
165
HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE GANNAMANENI RAMAKRISHNA PRASAD
WRIT PETITION NO: 21856/2025
24.11.2025
DSV
5
HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATHI MAIN CASE No: WRIT PETITION NO: 21856/2025 PROCEEDING SHEET Sl. No
DATE
ORDER Office Note
05.
24.11.2025 GRKP, J
Writ Petition is dismissed as withdrawn. (vide separate order)
___________
GRKP, J DSV
6