APHC010573832025 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) [3333] WEDNESDAY,THE FIFTH DAY OF NOVEMBER TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SMT JUSTICE V.SUJATHA WRIT PETITION NO: 29947/2025 Between: 1. S GANGADRI, S/O. CHINNA GANGAPPA, AGED ABOUT 55 YEARS, OCC FAIR PRICE SHOP DEALER, SHOP NO.1246029, YEDDULAVARIPALLI, H/O. KONDAKAMARLA VILLAGE OF O.D. CHERUVU MANDAL, SRI SATHYA SAI DISTRICT. ...PETITIONER AND 1. THE STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH, REP. BY ITS PRINCIPAL SECRETARY, CIVIL SUPPLIES DEPARTMENT, SECRETARIAT BUILDINGS, VELAGAPUDI, AMARAVATHI. 2. THE COLLECTOR DISTRICT MAGISTRATE, SRI SATHYA SAI DISTRICT, PUTTAPARTHI. 3. THE JOINT COLLECTOR AND ADDITIONAL DISTRICT MAGISTRATE, SRI SATHYA SAI DISTRICT, PUTTAPARTHI. 4. THE REVENUE DIVISIONAL OFFICER, PUTTAPARTHI SRI SATHYA SAI DISTRICT 2 VS,J W.P.NO.29947 OF 2025 5. THE TAHSILDAR, O.D. CHERUVU MANDAL, SRI SATHYA SAI 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 topleased to issue an appropriate Writ, Order or direction under Article 226 of constitution of India more particularly one in the nature of Writ of Mandamus declaring the proceedings in Rc.No.C/413/2025, dated 26.09.2025, issued by the Respondent No.4 declaring my authorization as not valid under rule 8(4) of Control Order, 2018 as arbitrary and illegal, contrary objectives of the provisions of the Andhra Pradesh State Targeted Public Distribution System (Control) Orders, 2018 and contrary to the well-established legal principles apart from being violative of the fundamental and Constitutional rights guaranteed to me under Articles 21 and 300-A of the Constitution of India and consequently set aside the same and continue my authorization for the subject shop 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 pleased to direct the respondent No.4 to continue me as fair price shop dealer by suspending the proceedings in Rc.No.C/413/2025, dated 26.09.2025, issued by the Respondent No.4, pending disposal of the above Writ Petition and pass Counsel for the Petitioner: 1. PAPUDIPPU SASHIDAR REDDY Counsel for the Respondent(S): 1. GP FOR CIVIL SUPPLIES The Court made the following: 3 VS,J W.P.NO.29947 OF 2025 ORDER:- This writ petition is filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India seeking the following relief: “….to issue a writ direction preferably writ of mandamus declaring the action of the respondents 3 and 4 in not supplying the Essential Commodities to the petitioners shop for distribution to the card holders in respect of Shop No. 1082002, Beedi Colony, Punganur Town and Mandal, Chittoor Dist., without there being any order of suspension or cancellation is illegal, arbitrary and violation of the provisions of AP State Targeted Public Distribution System (Control) Order, 2018 and violative of principles of natural justice and consequently direct the respondents to release Essential Commodities in favour of the petitioner as usual...” 2. Brief facts of the case of the petitioner is that:- a. The petitioner was appointed as a permanent fair price shop dealer for shop No.1246029 situated at Yeddulavaripalli, H/o. Kondakamrla Village of O.D.Cheruvu Mandal, Sri Sathya Sai District in the year 1986. The petitioner’s authorization has been extended from time to time. Since the date of his appointment, the petitioner has been distributing essential commodities to the cardholders without there being any complaint from any corner. b. While so, on 02.08.2025, an inspection was conducted in the petitioner’s fair price shop and found a variation of +220kgs of rice, few other irregularities such as non-displaying 4 VS,J W.P.NO.29947 OF 2025 of the board and also that the petitioner was not issuing slips to the cardholders after distributing commodities. Basing on the same, the petitioner was issued a show cause notice dated 05.08.2025. However, no action has been initiated against the petitioner thereafter, but the respondents stopped supplying essential commodities to him without any valid order of suspension or cancellation. Hence, the petitioner was constrained to file a writ petition No.22014 of 2025, wherein this Court passed the following order on 28.08.2025:- “In the present case on hand, the respondents ought to have considered the explanation submitted by the petitioner by affording an opportunity hearing and initiate disciplinary proceedings, if any, in accordance with law. Without any such action, the respondents cannot stop supply of essential commodities to the petitioner and also seized the e-pos machine of the petitioner’s Fair price shop, which is illegal and arbitrary in view of law laid down in the aforesaid judgment. In the light of the aforesaid facts and circumstances of the case, the respondents are hereby directed to supply the essential commodities to the petitioner, pending finalization of the disciplinary proceedings and also hand over the e-pos machine to the petitioner as expeditiously as possible, preferably within a period of three (3) days from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. “ 5 VS,J W.P.NO.29947 OF 2025 3. The grievance of the petitioner as on today is that, in pursuance of the orders passed by this Court, the 3rd respondent has once again issued the same show cause notice, which has been issued prior to the filing of the writ petition No.22014 of 2025, calling for explanation, for which the petitioner has submitted his explanation duly stating that he had already submitted an explanation on an earlier occasion i.e., on 08.05.2025, wherein it was stated that as per the orders of this Court in Writ petition No.22014 of 2025, the respondents were directed to supply essential commodities to the petitioner. However, the grievance of the petitioner as of now is that the 3rd respondent, even without considering the explanation submitted by the petitioner, has passed the impugned order simply stating that the petitioner’s authorization is not valid under Rule 8(4) of the APSTPDS (Control) Order 2018, and further the Tahsildar directed to make alternative arrangements for smooth administration of supplying essential commodities vide orders dated 26.09.2025. Challenging the said proceedings of the 3rd respondent, the present writ petition is filed. 4. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and learned Assistant Government Pleader for Civil Supplies. 6 VS,J W.P.NO.29947 OF 2025 5. On perusal of the impugned proceedings, it can be observed that the impugned proceedings do not reflect whether the petitioner’s authorization is suspended or cancelled, but however, the impugned proceedings simply state that the petitioner’s authorization is not valid under Rule 8(4) of APSTPDS (Control) Order, 2018. Clause 8(4) of the APSTPDS Control Order, 2018 is extracted as under: “This clause mandates that an inquiry must be conducted before a fair price shop authorization is suspended or canceled. This means authorities cannot revoke a license based solely on a report from another official without first giving the dealer an opportunity to be heard and conducting an independent inquiry to investigate the alleged violations. This rule is a key procedural safeguard to ensure fairness and prevent arbitrary action by the authorities.” 6. As the impugned proceedings did not reflect as to whether the petitioner’s authorization was suspended or cancelled, this Court is of the opinion that the impugned proceedings are liable to be set-aside and however, the matter is remanded back to the 3rd respondent for fresh consideration and the same may be considered basing upon the explanation submitted by the petitioner on 20.08.2025 and 16.09.2025, till such time the 7 VS,J W.P.NO.29947 OF 2025 respondents are directed to supply essential commodities to the petitioner. 7. With the above direction, the writ petition is allowed. No costs. As a sequel, miscellaneous applications, pending, if any, shall also stand closed. ____________________ JUSTICE V.SUJATHA Date :05.11.2025 LSP 8 VS,J W.P.NO.29947 OF 2025 260 THE HONOURABLE SMT JUSTICE V.SUJATHA WRIT PETITION NO: 29947/2025 Date :05.11.2025 LSP