APHC010685972025 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) [3333] MONDAY,THE TWENTY SECOND DAY OF DECEMBER TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SMT JUSTICE V.SUJATHA WRIT PETITION NO: 35372/2025 Between: 1. ANDE SUBHASHINI, W/O.KRISHNA, AGED ABOUT 43 YEARS, OCC CIVIL SUPPLIES DEALER, R/O.D.NO.17-32, NEAR VENKATESWARA SWAMY TEMPLE, ANDEVARI STREET, VETAPALEM VILLAGE AND MANDAL, BAPATIA DISTRICT. ...PETITIONER AND 1. THE STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH, REP.BY ITS PRINCIPAL SECRETARY TO GOVERNMENT (FOOD, CIVIL SUPPLIES AND CONSUMER AFFAIRS (CS-I) DEPARTMENT), SECRETARIAT, VELAGAPUDI, AMARAVATI, GUNTUR DISTRICT. 2. THE JOINT COLLECTOR CIVIL SUPPLIES WING, BAPATIA DISTRICT AT BAPATIA.-522237 3. THE REVENUE DIVISIONAL OFFICER, CHIRALA REVENUE DIVISION, CHIRALA TOWN AND MANDAL, BAPATIA DISTRICT.523115 4. THE TAHSILDAR, VETAPALEM MANDAL, BAPATIA DISTRICT. 523187 ...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, order or direction more particularly one in the nature of WRIT OF MANDAMUS declaring the action of respondents 2 to 4 in not 2 VS,J W.P.No.35372 of 2025 continuing the petitioner as Fair Price Shop Dealer for Shop No.0824040 situated in Ramannapeta Village in Vetapalem Mandal in Bapatia District without therein being any suspension or cancellation of the petitioner authorization pursuant to seizure of the stock at the instance of the mediators on 03.12.2025, as illegal, irregular, irrational, violative of provisions of Andhra Pradesh State Public Distribution Control Order, 2008 and offends Articles 14 ano 21 of Constitution of India and consequently direct the respondents 2 to 4 to continue the petitioner as Fair Price Shop Dealer for the said Fair price shop by supplying essential commodities every month for distribution cardholders and to 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 Pleased to direct the respondents 2 to 4 to continue the petitioner as Fair price shop dealer for Shop No.0824040 situated in Ramannapeta Village in Vetapalem Mandal in Bapatia District by supplying essential commodities every month for distribution to cardholders, pending disposal of main Writ Petition and pass Counsel for the Petitioner: 1. NAGA PRAVEEN VANKAYALAPATI Counsel for the Respondent(S): 1. GP FOR CIVIL SUPPLIES The Court made the following: 3 VS,J W.P.No.35372 of 2025 HONOURABLE SMT. JUSTICE V.SUJATHA WRIT PETITION No.35372 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, order or direction more particularly one in the nature of WRIT OF MANDAMUS declaring the action of respondents 2 to 4 in not continuing the petitioner as Fair Price Shop Dealer for Shop No.0824040 situated in Ramannapeta Village in Vetapalem Mandal in Bapatla District without therein being any suspension or cancellation of the petitioner’s authorization pursuant to seizure of the stock at the instance of the mediators on 03.12.2025, as illegal, irregular, irrational, violative of provisions of Andhra Pradesh State Public Distribution Control Order, 2008 and offends Articles 14 and 21 of Constitution of India and consequently direct the respondents 2 to 4 to continue the petitioner as Fair Price Shop Dealer for the said Fair price shop by supplying essential commodities every month for distribution cardholders…” 2. The petitioner was appointed as a Fair Price Shop Dealer for Shop No.0824040 situated in Ramannapeta Village, Vetapalem Mandal, in the year 2008. Thereafter, the petitioner’s authorization was renewed from time to time. 3. While things stood thus, the Bapatla District Civil Supplies Officers and Revenue Officers visited the petitioner’s Fair Price Shop on 03.12.2025 and, at the instance of mediators, seized the stock of PDS rice and sugar and entrusted the same to the Village Revenue Officer and informed the petitioner that a 6-A case is being registered against her under the Essential Commodities Act, 1955. However, the grievance of the petitioner in the present writ petition is that thereafter the respondents have stopped the 4 VS,J W.P.No.35372 of 2025 supply of essential commodities without there being any suspension or cancellation. Aggrieved by the same, the present writ petition is filed. 4. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned Assistant Government Pleader for Civil Supplies appearing for the respondents. 5. Learned Assistant Government Pleader for Civil Supplies has furnished a copy of the instructions of the 3rd respondent vide Rc.H/2024/2025, dated 20.12.2025, wherein it is admitted that an inspection of the petitioner’s Fair Price Shop was conducted on 03.12.2025 at about 11.00 a.m., during which certain variations of (+) 415 kgs of PDS rice and (-) 8 packets (each ½ kg) of sugar were found, and a report was submitted to the 3rd respondent for initiating disciplinary action against the petitioner. However, it is admitted that action is yet to be taken for issuance of a show cause notice calling for an explanation from the petitioner. 6. In the said instructions, except stating that disciplinary proceedings are yet to be initiated, nowhere it is stated that they have already initiated disciplinary proceedings as against the petitioner either by suspending or cancelling the petitioner’s authorization. 7. Earlier, a similar question came up before the Full Bench of High Court of Andhra Pradesh in Oleti Tirupathamma’s case (1 supra) wherein the Court held as follows – “A statutory authority, it is trite, must act within the four corners of the statute in terms of the statutory orders and procedure laid down to 5 VS,J W.P.No.35372 of 2025 suspend the licence. As already noticed hereinbefore, the authorities under the relevant orders have power to suspend the authorisation or licence of the dealer. Without applying its mind and without taking recourse thereto, the Court should not normally permit the authorities, unless extraordinary situation exists, to allow them to do something indirectly, which they cannot do it directly. If a broad proposition to this effect is laid down, the same, in a given case may amount to abuse of the process of law. The High Court while exercising its jurisdiction under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, acts sentinel qui vive and thus it has to protect the citizen from arbitrary and capricious action of the executive. If the licensing authority themselves upon application of mind come to the conclusion that the irregularities committed by the fair price shop dealer would warrant suspension of his licence, it may do so. But, in our considered opinion, the authority without taking recourse to the said action, cannot, refuse to supply the essential commodities. In the event an order of suspension of licence is passed, the authorities will have to make an alternative arrangement. But, in a case of this nature, the card holders would be the worst sufferers inasmuch their essential commodities would not be supplied to them at all.” 8. In view of the law laid down by Full Bench of High Court of Andhra Pradesh in the aforesaid judgment, this Court is of the opinion that the action of the respondents is illegal and arbitrary. Therefore, the respondents are directed to supply essential commodities to the petitioner by allowing her to distribute the same to the card holders, allotted to her fair price shop, till her dealership is terminated or till passing an order under Clause 8(4) of the Control Order, 2018. 9. Accordingly, the Writ Petition is disposed of. There shall be no order as to costs. 6 VS,J W.P.No.35372 of 2025 As a sequel, miscellaneous applications, pending, if any, shall also stand closed. ____________________ JUSTICE V.SUJATHA Date :22.12.2025 JLV 7 VS,J W.P.No.35372 of 2025 189 THE HONOURABLE SMT JUSTICE V.SUJATHA WRIT PETITION NO: 35372/2025 Date :22.12.2025 JLV