APHC010696262022 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) [3333] MONDAY,THE EIGHTH DAY OF DECEMBER TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SMT JUSTICE V.SUJATHA WRIT PETITION NO: 41136/2022 Between: 1. BATCHU RENUKA, W/O. VENKATA RAM MOHANA RAO, AGED ABOUT 40 YEARS, OCC. F.P SHOP DEALER. SHOP NO.07830008, R/O D.NO.7-4-35/1, SANGAM BAZAR, SATTENAPALLI TOWN, PALNADU DISTRICT. ...PETITIONER AND 1. THE STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH, REP., BY ITS PRINCIPAL SECRETARY, CIVIL SUPPLIES DEPARTMENT, SECRETARIAT, VELAGAPUDI, AMARAVATI, GUNTUR DISTRICT. 2. THE REVENUE DIVISIONAL OFFICER, SATHENAPALLI, PALNADU DISTRICT. 3. THE TAHSILDAR, SATTENAPALLI MANDAL, PALNADU DISTRICT. 4. THE DEPUTY TAHSILDAR, SATTENAPALLI, SATTENAPALLI TOWN, PALNADU DISTRICT. 5. SMT JAKKA SRAVANTHI, W/O RAMULU, PRESIDENT, VEDA GAITRI, MDG GROUP, 5TH WARD, 2 VS,J W.P.NO.41136 OF 2022 SATTENAPALLI TOWN, PALNADU 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 a writ or order more particularly one in the nature of writ of mandamus or an appropriate writ or order declaring the proceedings in Rc. No.1205/2022-DT, dated 02.12.202'2 issued by the 2nd respondent appointing the 5th respondent as a Temporary Dealer in my place pertaining to F.P Shop Dealer Shop No.07830008, Sattenapalli Town, Palnad3.1 (Guntur) District as a Temporary Dealer in the place of th.a petitioner without any authority of law is illegal arbitrary and contrary to the Control orders 2018 and consequently direct the respondent 2 and 3 to allow the petitioner to distribute the commodities and pass IA NO: 1 OF 2022 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 suspend proceedings in Rc. No.1205/2022-DT, dated 02.12.2022 issued by the 2nd respondent appointing the 5th respondent as a Temporary Dealer in my place pertaining to F.P Shop Dealer Shop No.07830008, Sattenapalli Town, Palnadu (Guntur) District, by directing to continue the petitioner as F.P. Slop Dealer pending disposal of the writ petition and pass IA NO: 1 OF 2023 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 vacate the interim order date:21.12.2022 in W.P.No.41136 of 2022 and dismiss the writ Petition and Counsel for the Petitioner: 3 VS,J W.P.NO.41136 OF 2022 1. KOTI REDDY IDAMAKANTI Counsel for the Respondent(S): 1. GP FOR CIVIL SUPPLIES The Court made the following: 4 VS,J W.P.NO.41136 OF 2022 ORDER:- This writ petition is filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India seeking the following relief: “….to issue a writ or order more particularly one in the nature of writ of mandamus or an appropriate writ or order declaring the proceedings in Rc. No.1205/2022-DT, dated 02.12.2022 issued by the 2nd respondent appointing the 5th respondent as a Temporary Dealer in my place pertaining to F.P Shop Dealer Shop No.07830008, Sattenapalli Town, Palnadu (Guntur) District as a Temporary Dealer in the place of the petitioner without any authority of law is illegal arbitrary and contrary to the Control orders 2018 and consequently direct the respondent 2 and 3 to allow the petitioner to distribute the commodities...” 2. The petitioner was appointed as a permanent Fair Price Shop Dealer for Shop No.0783008 of Sattenapalli Town, Palnadu (Guntur) District, in the year 2007 and petitioner’s authorization is in subsistence up to March, 2023. Since the date of her appointment, the petitioner has been distributing essential commodities to the cardholders without any complaint from any quarter. 3. While so, in the month of August, 2022, at the behest of the ruling party leaders, the 3rd respondent pressurized the petitioner to resign from the fair price shop dealership. When the petitioner 5 VS,J W.P.NO.41136 OF 2022 refused to submit her resignation, the 3rd respondent further pressurized her to sign on a blank white paper, in pursuance of which, the petitioner signed on a blank white paper and handed it over to the 3rd respondent in August, 2022. Subsequently, it appears that the 3rd respondent wrote on the said blank white paper as though the petitioner had submitted her resignation due to ill-health. Thereafter, the petitioner submitted a representation on 05.12.2022 to the 3rd respondent requesting to continue her by revoking the letter as it was obtained under pressure of the 3rd respondent. However, despite the same, the 3rd respondent issued proceedings dated 02.12.2022 accepting the petitioner’s resignation and allotted the shop through one Smt.Jakka Sravanthi W/o.Sri Ramulu, Group President of “Veda Gaitri” MDG Group Sattenapalli Town. Challenging which, the present writ petition is filed. 4. When the writ petition came up for admission on 21.12.2022, this Court passed the following interim order:- “It appears, no proper investigation is conducted whether the Tahsildar, Sattenapalli, obtained the signature of the petitioner on undated letter or signature of the petitioner is forged in the resignation letter. In fact, a copy of the Resignation Letter, which was filed as Ex.P.2, did not contain any date. On overall 6 VS,J W.P.NO.41136 OF 2022 consideration of all these issued, there may be some suspicious circumstances behind issuing the impugned order. However, as the respondent No.5 is appointed on temporary basis and the petitioner is the permanent dealer, who is willing to discharge her functions as Fair Price shop dealer, in the prima facie opinion of this Court, it is appropriate to permit the petitioner to continue as Fair Price Shop Dealer. Accordingly, there shall be an interim suspension as prayed for.” 5. Learned counsel for the petitioner stated that in pursuance of the interim order granted by this Court on 21.12.2022 the petitioner is being continued as fair price shop dealer. 6. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned Assistant Government Pleader for Civil Supplies. 7. The 2nd respondent filed counter, wherein it is stated that the 2nd respondent had not accepted the petitioner’s resignation, with a view to afford an opportunity of hearing to the petitioner as she is a permanent fair price shop dealer. In the counter, the allegation of the taking of the resignation letter of the petitioner forcibly by the respondent No.3 is denied. 8. It is further stated that the petitioner kept quiet till the 5th respondent was appointed on temporary basis on 02.12.2022 and thereafter challenging the said appointment of the 5th respondent, 7 VS,J W.P.NO.41136 OF 2022 the petitioner has filed this writ petition. As per the said counter affidavit, it can be understood that the petitioner has specifically raised the plea that the petitioner’s signature was obtained on blank white paper and converted to a resignation letter. 9. In Chinnareddigari Sambasiva Reddy, S/o Ramaswamy vs. State of A.P and others, 1 the Hon’ble High Court of Telangana and Andhra Pradesh, Hyderabad at para No.16 held as under:- “..Ordinarily, no fair price shop dealer would like to quit his assignment. If such extra-ordinary desire is expressed by any dealer, it is incumbent upon the appointing authority/2nd respondent to put the dealer on notice before accepting the resignation as, foul play by vested interests cannot be ruled out. Therefore, I cannot appreciate the action of respondent No.2 in purporting to ratify the hasty and unauthorized action of respondent No.3 without even trying to get the confirmation from the petitioner as to whether he has sent his resignation out of his free will or the same is secured by any vested interests by force. The failure of respondent No.2 to make and enquiry in this regard by issuing notice to the petitioner vitiates the entire action of respondent Nos.2 & 3 in easing out the petitioner from the fair price shop dealership. As respondent No.2 has not properly exercised his jurisdiction in acting on the purported resignation of the petitioner, his action culminating the acceptance/ratification of resignation of the 1 2014 LawSuit(Hyd) 740 8 VS,J W.P.NO.41136 OF 2022 petitioner is declared as illegal and the impugned order is, accordingly, set aside. As the petitioner is inclined to continue as a fair price shop dealer, he shall be permitted to continue as such under the authorization held by him.” 10. In view of the facts and circumstances and with the above observation, the writ petition is allowed. No costs. Consequently, Miscellaneous Petitions, if any, pending in this Petition shall stand closed. ____________________ JUSTICE V.SUJATHA Date :08.12.2025 LSP