1 VS,J WP.No.34292 of 2025 APHC010661782025 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) [3333] TUESDAY,THE NINTH DAY OF DECEMBER TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SMT JUSTICE V.SUJATHA WRIT PETITION NO: 34292/2025 Between: 1. B SOMESHAIAH, S/O. RAMANNA, AGED ABOUT 45 YEARS, OCC FP SHOP DEALER OF SHOP NO.1262017 R/O.P.BYADIGERA VILLAGE, AGALI MANDAL, SRI SATHYA SAI DISTRICT ERSTWHILE ANANTAPUR DISTRICT. ...PETITIONER AND 1. THE STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH, REP. BY THE PRINCIPAL SECRETARY, CIVIL SUPPLIES DEPARTMENT, SECRETARIAT BUILDINGS, AT VELAGAPUDI,AMARAVATHI,ANDHRA PRADESH. 2. THE DISTRICT COLLECTOR, SRI SATHYA SAI DISTRICT AT PUTTAPARTHY, ERSTWHILE ANANTAPUR DISTRICT. 3. THE JOINT COLLECTOR, SRI SATHYA SAI DISTRICT AT PUTTAPARTHY, ERSTWHILE ANANTAPUR DISTRICT. 4. THE REVENUE DIVISIONAL OFFICER, PENUKONDA, SRI SATHYA SAI DISTRICT ERSTWHILE ANANTAPUR DISTRICT. 5. THE TAHSILDAR, AGALI MANDAL, SRI SATHYA SAI DISTRICT ERSTWHILE ANANTAPUR DISTRICT. ...RESPONDENT(S): 2 VS,J WP.No.34292 of 2025 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, order or direction more particularly one in the nature of Writ of Mandamus questioning the action of the 4th respondent in issuing proceedings Rc.No.2855/2025/C dated 28.11.2025 by terminating the petitioner to hold F.P Shop.No. 1262017 of P.Byadigera Village, Agali Mandal, Sri Sathya Sai District Erstwhile Anantapur District without there being any valid reason, without offering personal hearing to the petitioner as illegal, arbitrary and violative of principles of natural justice and violative of Articles 14, 19(1 )(g) of the Constitution of India and also violative of Andhra Pradesh State Targeted Public Distribution System (Control) Order 2018 and consequently set-aside the same and further direct the respondents to continue the petitioner to hold F.P Shop.No. 1262017 of P.Byadigera Village, Agali Mandal, Sri Sathya Sai District Erstwhile Anantapur District 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 respondents to continue the petitioner as F.P. shop Dealer and to supply essential commodities to the petitioner’s F.P Shop.No.1262017 of P.Byadigera Village, Agali Mandal, Sri Sathya Sai District Erstwhile Anantapur District by suspending the proceedings of 4 respondent vide Rc.No.2855/2025/C dated 28.11.2025, pending disposal of Writ Petition and to pass Counsel for the Petitioner: 1. P NARAHARI BABU Counsel for the Respondent(S): 1. GP FOR CIVIL SUPPLIES The Court made the following: 3 VS,J WP.No.34292 of 2025 ORDER: This Writ Petition came to be 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 Writ of Mandamus questioning the action of the 4th respondent in issuing proceedings Rc.No.2855/2025/C dated 28.11.2025 by terminating the petitioner to hold F.P Shop.No. 1262017 of P.Byadigera Village, Agali Mandal, Sri Sathya Sai District Erstwhile Anantapur District without there being any valid reason, without offering personal hearing to the petitioner as illegal, arbitrary and violative of principles of natural justice and violative of Articles 14, 19(1 )(g) of the Constitution of India and also violative of Andhra Pradesh State Targeted Public Distribution System (Control) Order 2018 and consequently set-aside the same and further direct the respondents to continue the petitioner to hold F.P Shop.No. 1262017 of P.Byadigera Village, Agali Mandal, Sri Sathya Sai District Erstwhile Anantapur District and pass” 2. The petitioner herein was appointed as a fair price shop dealer of shop No.1262017 of Agali mandal, Sri Satya Sai District on temporary basis in the year 2004 and ever since, the petitioner has been distributing essential commodities to the cardholders without there being any complaints from whomsoever concerned. 3. While the matter stood thus, on 06.10.2025, the 5th respondent and other officials inspected the petitioner’s fair price shop and found a variation of (-)138 kilograms of rice and (+)3 packets of sugar each weighing 500 4 VS,J WP.No.34292 of 2025 kilograms. As such, the entire stock was seized and was handed over to the Village Revenue Officer. As the supply of commodities to the petitioner’s fair price shop was stopped without there being any order of suspension or cancellation, the petitioner approached this Court by filing W.P.No.29514 of 2025, which was disposed of on 29.10.2025 by directing the respondents to supply essential commodities to the petitioner’s fair price shop. 4. Pursuant to the said order, the respondent authorities have issued commodities to the petitioner’s fair price shop, however, based on a report of the 4th respondent, the petitioner was issued a show cause notice on 04.11.2025 framing two charges and seeking his explanation within seven days. Accordingly, the petitioner submitted his explanation on 12.11.2025, without considering which, the 4th respondent, vide impugned proceedings dated 28.11.2025, terminated the authorization of the petitioner and directed the 5th respondent to make alternative arrangements. Aggrieved by the action of the respondents, this writ petition is filed. 5. Heard Sri. P. Narahari Babu, learned counsel for the petitioner and learned Assistant Government Pleader for Civil Supplies. Perused the entire material available on record. 6. It is brought to the notice of this Court by learned Assistant Government Pleader that as of now, the subject fair price shop was handed over to the concerned Village Revenue Officer. 5 VS,J WP.No.34292 of 2025 7. Admittedly, subsequent to an inspection conducted on 06.10.2025, the petitioner was issued a show cause notice on 04.11.2025 wherein the following charges were framed: “CHARGE No.1: That the FP shop dealer has failed to maintain scheduled commodities physically on the ground as per the balances shown in ePOS device and there is shortage of fortified Rice 138 Kgs and excess of Sugar (Kg, Packets) 51 packets in FP shop at the time of inspection, which is in violation of clause 12 (P)(3) & clause 29 of APSTPDS (Control) Order 2018. CHARGE No.2: That the F.P.Shop Dealer has diverted stock of fortified Rice of 1.38 Kgs into black market and indulged in clandestine business for his pecuniary gains which is violation of clause of 25(D) and 21(b) of APSRTPDS (Control) Order 2018.” 8. Pursuant to the aforesaid show cause notice, the petitioner submitted his explanation on 12.11.2025 for both the charges. Considering the same, the Charge No.1 framed against the petitioner was dropped as not proved. The explanation submitted by the petitioner with respect to the 2nd charge is that the variation in sugar arose as few cardholders have not collected their share of the sugar even after giving their biometric. Admittedly, no enquiry was conducted in respect of this charge. Without conducting any enquiry in the presence of cardholders with regard to the 2nd charge, the 4th respondent has straightaway terminated the petitioner’s authorization. 6 VS,J WP.No.34292 of 2025 9. Even otherwise, a perusal of the show cause notice dated 04.11.2025 would show that except reiterating the facts that led to seizure of the stock and except framing two charges, the 4th respondent failed to mention the purpose of issuing such show cause notice i.e., whether it is issued for suspension or cancellation of the authorization of the petitioner. Without specifying proposed action to be initiated, the 4th respondent issued the show cause notice seeking explanation from the petitioner. It is a well known principle that a notice must be given to the person before any adverse action is taken and such notice cannot be vague and ambiguous to the proposed action to be taken so as to apprise the authorities determinatively the cases he has to deal. In other words, the person concerned must be informed of the charges and allegations clearly so as to enable him to fully meet those allegations and defend himself. 10. In view of the above discussion, the impugned proceeding dated 28.11.2025 and the show cause notice dated 04.11.2025 are hereby set- aside. However, it is left open to the respondents to initiate appropriate action as against the petitioner, if required, by duly following the procedure reiterated by this Court in the common order dated 19.11.2025 in W.P.No.24494 of 2025 and batch. It is needless to state that the respondents shall continue the petitioner as a fair price shop dealer of shop No.1262017 of Agali mandal, Sri Satya Sai District until an adverse order is passed against him. 7 VS,J WP.No.34292 of 2025 11. In the result, this writ petition is allowed. There shall be no order as to costs. Consequently, miscellaneous applications, pending, if any, shall also stand closed. ___________________ JUSTICE V. SUJATHA Date:09.12.2025 Gss