APHC010627812025 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) [3333] MONDAY,THE TWENTY FOURTH DAY OF NOVEMBER TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SMT JUSTICE V.SUJATHA WRIT PETITION NO: 32548/2025 Between: 1. VAKADA YERRANNAREDDY, S/O LATE KURMAYYAREDDY, AGED ABOUT 62 YEARS, OCC - DEALER, F.P.SHOP. 0130651, KOTHA AGRAHARAM VILLAGE, NANDIGAM MANDAL, SRIKAKULAM DISTRICT. ...PETITIONER AND 1. THE STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH, REP. BY ITS SECRETARY, CIVIL SUPPLIES DEPARTMENT, ANDHRA PRADESH SECRETARIAT BUILDINGS, HYDERABAD. 2. THE JOINT COLLECTOR, SRIKAKULAM , SRIKAKULAM DISTRICT. 3. THE REVENUE DIVISIONAL OFFICER, PALASA DIVISION, SRIKAKULAM DISTRICT. 4. THETAHSILDAR, NANDIGAMA MANDAL SRIKAKULAM DISTRICT ...RESPONDENT(S): Counsel for the Petitioner: 1. A RAVI SHANKAR Counsel for the Respondent(S): 1. GP FOR REVENUE 2. GP FOR CIVIL SUPPLIES 2 Order: This Writ Petition is filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India seeking the following prayer; “….to issue a Writ, Order or Direction, more particularly one in the nature of Mandamus, declaring the action of the respondents in not supplying the essential commodities to the petitioner Fair Price Shop at Kothagraharam Village, Nandigam mandal for distribution to card holders in spite of subsistence of Fair Price Shop authorization as illegal and arbitrary and consequently direct the respondents to supply essential commodities for distribution to card holders as otherwise I suffer irreparable loss and injury.” 2. Today when matter is came up for hearing, the learned Assistant Government Pleader has furnished copy of proceedings vide RC.738/2025/DT(LR) dt.22.11.2025 which shows that the 3rd respondent have suspended the petitioner’s authorization basing on the report given by the Tahsildar dated 09.08.2025. In view of the same, the learned counsel for the petitioner have requested this court to withdraw the present writ petition with a liberty to challenge the proceedings of the 3rd respondent dated 11.08.2025. 3. Permission is accorded. 4. Accordingly, the Writ Petition is dismissed as withdrawn. There shall be no order as to costs. 5. As a sequel thereto, the miscellaneous petitions, if any, pending in this Writ Petition shall stand closed. JUSTICE V.SUJATHA Date: 24.11.2025 JAK/MH 3 THE HONOURABLE SMT JUSTICE V.SUJATHA WRIT PETITION NO: 32548/2025 Date:24.11.2025 JAK/MH