APHC010709152025 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) [3457] TUESDAY,THE THIRTIETH DAY OF DECEMBER TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE HARINATH.N WRIT PETITION NO: 36418/2025 Between: 1. GAJULAMMAGARI SUJATHA, W/O NARASAIAH AGE 48 YEARS, OCC F.P. SHOP DEALER FOR SHOP NO.1302005, KOSIGI VILLAGE AND MANDAL KURNOOL DIST. PIN 518313 ...PETITIONER AND 1. THE STATE OF AP, REP.BY ITS PRINCIPLE SECRETARY CIVIL SUPPLIES DEPARTMENT, SECRETARIAT, VELAGAPUDI, GUNTUR DIST.-522237 2. THE COLLECTOR CS, KURNOOL DIST., AT KURNOOL.-518313 3. THE REVENUE DIVISIONAL OFFICER, ADONI DIVISION, KURNOOL DIST.-518301 4. THE TAHSILDAR, KOSIGI MANDAL, KURNOOL DIST.-518313 ...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 Writ Order or Orders or a Direction more particularly one in the nature of Writ of Mandamus declaring the impugned order issued by the 3rd respondent vide Rc.M.2110/2025 dt15-12-2025 suspending the petitioners authorization in respect of FP Shop No.1302005, Kosigi Village and Mandal, Kurnool Dist., without assigning any valid reasons 2 and without following the procedure as contemplated under AP State Targeted Public Distribution System (Control) Order, 2018 apart from violation of the principles of natural justice and consequentially set aside the impugned order dt 15-12-2025 by directing the Respondents to continue petitioner as FP Shop dealer as usual, 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 Suspend the impugned order passed by the 3rd respondent vide Rc.M.2110/2025 dt 15-12-2025 in respect of FP Shop No.1302005, Kosigi Village and Mandal, Kurnool Dist., by continuing the petitioner as dealer as usual, pending disposal of the writ petition. Counsel for the Petitioner: 1. M M M SRINIVASA RAO Counsel for the Respondent(S): 1. GP FOR CIVIL SUPPLIES The Court made the following: 3 ORDER: The petitioner is aggrieved by the order dated 15.12.2025, whereby, the petitioner’s license for running the Fair Price Shop bearing No.1302005 has been suspended and the Tahsildar, Kosigi Mandal was requested to make alternative arrangements for running the said Fair Price Shop. 2. The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner initially was served with a show-cause notice dated 31.10.2025, whereby, the petitioner was called upon to submit explanation with regard to the variation in the stock, which was beyond the permissible limit of 1.5%. 3. It is submitted that the petitioner submitted an explanation on 12.11.2025 and the 3rd respondent on 15.12.2025, passed an order, whereby, the 3rd respondent has confirmed seven charges and also stated that the petitioner submitted her explanation for four charges and subsequently, passed the order suspending the petitioner’s license, pending enquiry. 4. It is submitted that the show-cause notice neither framed any charge nor calls upon the petitioner to submit explanation on the seven charges, which are framed by the 3rd respondent while passing the impugned order. 5. It is submitted that had the petitioner been served with the show-cause notice to the said charges made and an opportunity of appropriately responding would have been granted to the petitioner. However, without the charges finding place in the show-cause notice, the 3rd respondents has 4 determined and considered the explanation submitted by the petitioner as response to the said charges and passed the impugned order. 6. The learned Assistant Government Pleader appearing for the respondents, submits that the order of suspension is pending enquiry and the enquiry would be completed in a time bound manner. 7. It is also submitted that the petitioner himself had admitted the variation in the stock to the extent of 70 KGs. 8. In reply, the learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the explanation clarifying the excess stock of 70 KGs was adequately submitted which was not considered by the 3rd respondent while passing the impugned order, suspending the petitioner’s license. 9. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned Assistant Government Pleader for Civil Supplies appearing for the respondents and perused the material on record. 10. The impugned order was passed on the seven charges framed and the explanation was submitted by the petitioner. However, as seen from the show- cause notice, no such charges were framed requiring the petitioner to submit her explanation on each of the said charges framed. In the absence of the petitioner requiring her to submit explanation for the seven charges, the same cannot be the basis for passing the impugned order dated 15.12.2025. 11. On these considerations, this Writ Petition stands disposed of by setting aside the impugned suspension order dated 15.12.2025 and the petitioner 5 shall be permitted to continue the Fair Price Shop bearing No.1302005, Kosigi Village and Mandal, Kurnool District, pending enquiry, the matter is remanded back to the 3rd respondent for fresh consideration. No costs. As a sequel, miscellaneous applications pending, if any, shall also stand closed. ___________________ JUSTICE HARINATH.N SCH 6 253 HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE HARINATH.N Writ Petition No.36418 of 2025 Date: 30.12.2025 SCH