APHC010374492024 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: 19267/2024 Between: 1. SMT. VEMULA VENKATARAMANA, W/O MALLIKAIJUNA RAO, AGED 48 YEARS, OCC FAIR PRICE SHOP DEALER, R/O SAVALYAPURAM VILLAGE AND MANDAL, GUNTUR DISTRICT. ...PETITIONER AND 1. THE STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH, REP. BY ITS PRINCIPAL SECRETARY, CIVIL SUPPLIES DEPARTMENT, VELAGAPUDI, AMARAVATHI, GUNTUR DISTRICT. 2. THE JOINT COLLECTOR AND ADDL DISTRICT MAGISTRATE, NARASARAOPET, PALNADU DISTRICT. 3. THE REVENUE DIVISIONAL OFFICER, NARASARAOPET, PALNADU DISTRICT. 4. THE TAHSILDAR, SAVALYAPURAM MANDAL, PALNADU DISTRICT. 5. JAKKA SUBBA RAO, S/O VENKATESWARLU, AGED 65 YEARS, OCC CULTIVATION, R/O SAVALYAPURAM VILLAGE, SAVALYAPURAM MANDAL, 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 to pleased to issue a Writ of Mandamus or any other appropriate Writ Order or direction, declaring the impugned proceedings Rc.No.1513/2024-G 2 VS,J W.P.No.19267 of 2024 dated 21-08-2024 on the file of the Revenue Divisional Officer, Narasaraopet, Palandu District, as illegal, arbitrary and also violative of provisions of A.P.S.T.P.D.S (Control) Order, 2018 and pass IA NO: 1 OF 2024 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 grant stay of all further proceedings in pursuant to the impugned proceedings Rc.No.1513/2024-G dated 21-08-2024 on the file of the Revenue Divisional Officer, Narasaraopet, Palandu District, pending disposal of the above Writ Petition and pass IA NO: 2 OF 2024 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 granted in I. A No. 1 of 2024 in W. P. No. 19267 of 2024 dated 11.09.2024 and pass Counsel for the Petitioner: 1. M S P REDDY Counsel for the Respondent(S): 1. K SRINIVAS 2. GP FOR CIVIL SUPPLIES The Court made the following: 3 VS,J W.P.No.19267 of 2024 ORDER: The present Writ Petition came to be filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India seeking the following relief:- “… to issue a Writ of Mandamus or any other appropriate Writ Order or direction, declaring the impugned proceedings Rc.No.1513/2024-G dated 21-08-2024 on the file of the Revenue Divisional Officer, Narasaraopet, Palandu District, as illegal, arbitrary and also violative of provisions of A.P.S.T.P.D.S (Control) Order, 2018. ….” 2. Brief facts of the case are as follows: a) The petitioner, being a member of Bala Vikas Mahila Podupu Sangham, Savalyapuram (DWACRA Group) was appointed as a Fair Price Shop dealer for Shop No.0742001 of Savalyapuram Village vide Rc.No.1028/2024-G, dated 27.06.2024. b) The case of the petitioner is that initially the 5th respondent was appointed as a Fair Price Shop Dealer for the subject shop and, as he was indulged in malpractice of black-marketing the essential commodities meant for the Public Distribution System, the 2nd respondent passed an order dated 19.11.2019 suspending the authorization of the 5th respondent. Challenging the same, the 5th respondent filed W.P.No.2866 of 2020. The said writ petition was allowed vide order dated 07.02.2020, which reads as under: “….this writ petition is allowed and the impugned suspension order vide Rc.No.1133/2019-S1, dated 19.11.2019 is set aside and the petitioner is directed to submit his explanation, within seven (07) days from today, in which case, the respondent No.2 shall consider the same and after affording personal hearing to the petitioner, pass an order in 4 VS,J W.P.No.19267 of 2024 accordance with the governing law and rules expeditiously. Till such exercise is completed, the petitioner shall be permitted to operate the Fair Price Shop No.0742001 of Savalyapuram Village and Mandal, Narsaraopet.” c) The grievance of the petitioner in the present writ petition is that, though the petitioner was appointed on 27.06.2024 on a temporary basis, vide order dated 21.08.2024, the 3rd respondent directed the 4th respondent to implement the orders passed by the 2nd respondent dated 24.02.2020, wherein the 5th respondent was permitted to lift and distribute essential commodities to the cardholders in pursuance of the orders passed by this Court on 07.02.2020. Accordingly, the 5th respondent was permitted. Challenging the said impugned order 21.08.2024 passed by the 3rd respondent, the present writ petition is filed. 3. When the matter came up for admission on 11.09.2024, this Court granting stay of the proceedings dated 21.08.2024 passed by the 3rd respondent. 4. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned Assistant Government Pleader for Civil Supplies. 5. Learned counsel for the petitioner contended that the 5th respondent did not submit any explanation as directed by this Court in W.P.No.2866 of 2020 and, as such, there was no occasion for the 2nd respondent to pass orders permitting the 5th respondent to continue as a Fair Price Shop dealer. It is further contended that the 5th respondent abandoned the Fair Price Shop and 5 VS,J W.P.No.19267 of 2024 did not renew the authorization, which expired on 31.03.2020. Since the 5th respondent did not renew his Fair Price Shop authorization and did not choose to run the shop, the 3rd respondent has appointed the petitioner as a temporary dealer to run the subject shop. However, basing on the representations dated 25.07.2024 and 05.08.2024 made by the 5th respondent, the 3rd respondent passed the impugned order permitting the 5th respondent to lift the stock and distribute essential commodities to the cardholders, even without affording any opportunity of hearing to the petitioner. 6. Admittedly, the 5th respondent, challenging the authorization under suspension vide proceedings dated 19.11.2019, has initially filed W.P.No.2866 of 2020 and the said writ petition was allowed by this Court vide orders dated 27.06.2024, setting aside the suspension order in Rc.No.1133/2019-S1, dated 19.11.2019, and directing the 5th respondent herein to submit his explanation within seven (07) days. 7. On a perusal of the impugned proceedings dated 21.08.2024, it can be observed that the 5th respondent has not submitted any explanation in pursuance of the orders passed by this Court in W.P.No.2866 of 2020. Instead, basing on the representations dated 25.07.2024 and 05.08.2024, the 2nd respondent permitted the 5th respondent to lift and distribute essential commodities to the cardholders without conducting any enquiry, as directed by this Court in W.P.No.2866 of 2020. 6 VS,J W.P.No.19267 of 2024 8. It is also the case of the petitioner that the petitioner was continued in pursuance of the interim order granted by this Court on 11.09.2024. On the other hand, it can also be observed that admittedly no notice was given to the petitioner before passing the impugned order, though the petitioner has been working for the past four years as a Fair Price Shop dealer to the subject shop. 9. For the foregoing reasons, the Writ Petition is allowed, setting aside the impugned order 21.08.2024 passed by the 3rd respondent. The matter is remitted back to the 3rd respondent with a direction to implement the order dated 27.06.2024 passed by this Court in W.P.No.2866 of 2020 and pass appropriate orders in accordance with law. Till such time, there shall be a direction to the 3rd respondent/Revenue Divisional Officer, to continue the petitioner as a Fair Price Shop Dealer. As a sequel, Interlocutory Applications pending, if any, shall stand closed __________________ JUSTICE V.SUJATHA Dated: 09.12.2025 KGR