APHC010558012025 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: 28957/2025 Between: 1. KANDULA BAPUJI, S/O, LATE UMA MAHESWARA RAO, AGED ABOUT 60 YEARS, D. NO. 5/213-1, JAVVARUPET, MACHILIPATNAM, KRISHNA DISTRICT. ...PETITIONER AND 1. THE STATE OF AP, REP. BY ITS PRINCIPAL SECRETARY, CONSUMER AFFAIRS AND CIVIL SUPPLIES DEPARTMENT, SECRETARIAT BUILDINGS, VELAGAPUDI, AMARAVATI, GUNTUR DISTRICT. 2. THE STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH, REP. BY ITS PRINCIPAL SECRETARY, HOME DEPARTMENT, SECRETARIAT BUILDINGS, VELAGAPUDI, AMARAVATI, GUNTUR DISTRICT. 3. THE COMMISSIONER CIVIL SUPPLIES, AP STATE CIVIL SUPPLIES CORPORATION LTD, D. NO. 10-152/1, CIVIL SUPPLIES BHAVAN, FLOOR, SRI SAI TOWERS, BESIDE SIRIS COMPANY, KANURU, VIJAYAWADA, KRISHNA DISTRICT - 520007. 4. THE DISTRICT COLLECTOR CUM DISTRICT MAGISTRATE, MACHILIPATNAM, KRISHNA DISTRICT. 5. THE DISTRICT SUPPLY OFFICER, MACHILIPATNAM, KRISHNA DISTRICT. 6. THE SUPERINTENDENT OF POLICE, MACHILIPATNAM, KRISHNA DISTRICT. 7. THE REVENUE DIVISIONAL OFFICER, MACHILIPATNAM DIVISION KRISHNA DISTRICT. 2 VS,J W.P.No.28957 of 2025 8. THE TAHSILDAR, MACHILIPATNAM DIVISION, KRISHNA DISTRICT. 9. THE PDS VIGILANCE AND ENFORCEMENT DEPARTMENT, VIJAYAWADA, KRISHNA DISTRICT. 10. THE PDS DEPUTY TAHSILDAR, MACHILIPATNAM, KRISHNA 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 issue a Writ, Order, or Direction, particularly in the nature of a Writ of Mandamus, declaring the action of the respondents 3 to 7 in not issuing directions to respondents Nos. 9 and 10 to stop from interfering with the lawful business activities of the Petitioner and to restrain from taking any coercive actions, without following due process of law, as illegal, arbitrary, and violative of the fundamental rights guaranteed under Articles 14, 19, and 21 of the Constitution of India, and contrary to the express provisions of the Essential Commodities Act, 1955 and consequently, direct the respondents 3 to 7 to ensure that the respondents 9 and 10 do not any obstruction, harassment, or illegal interference in the petitioner's lawful business activities 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 to direct the respondents 3 to 7 to ensure that the respondents 9 & 10 do not cause any obstruction, harassment, illegal interference in the petitioner’s lawful business activities, and grant such other relief as may be deemed fit and proper in the facts and circumstances of the case. Counsel for the Petitioner: 1. K SRINIVAS Counsel for the Respondent(S): 1. GP FOR HOME 2. GP FOR CIVIL SUPPLIES The Court made the following 3 VS,J W.P.No.28957 of 2025 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, Order, or Direction, more particularly in the nature of a Writ of Mandamus, declaring the action of the respondents 3 to 7 in not issuing directions to respondents Nos. 9 & 10 to stop from interfering with the lawful business activities of the Petitioner and to restrain from taking any coercive actions, without following due process of law, as illegal, arbitrary, and violative of the fundamental rights guaranteed under Articles 14, 19, and 21 of the Constitution of India, and contrary to the express provisions of the Essential Commodities Act, 1955 and consequently, direct the respondents 3 to 7 to ensure that the respondents 9 & 10 do not cause any obstruction, harassment, or illegal interference in the petitioner's lawful business activities…..” 2. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner as well as learned Assistant Government Pleader for Civil Supplies. 3. The petitioner has been running a rice mill and carrying on wholesale and retail rice business for the past several years. The grievance of the petitioner in the present writ petition is only that respondent Nos.9 & 10 are frequently interfering with the lawful business activities of the petitioner. 4. Today, when the matter came up for hearing, learned Assistant Government Pleader for Civil Supplies has furnished a copy of the instructions of the Collector (CS), Krishna, Machilipatnam vide Rc.D1/47/2024, dated 4 VS,J W.P.No.28957 of 2025 23.10.2025, wherein it is stated that the petitioner is involved in 31 6-A cases and 24 FIRs since 2012. As per Clause 20(a) of Andhra Pradesh State TPDS Control Order 2018, “Power of entry, inspect, search and seize the scheduled commodities, ask questions for production of documents etc.”, the respondents have every right to inspect the Fair Price Shop and to search and seize the scheduled commodities if at all there are any variations. The relevant provisions are as follows: “(a) Any officer or person authorized by the State Government or by the District Collector or by Collector (Civil Supplies), the appointing authority or any officer of the Civil Supplies / other State Govt. departments not below the rank of Revenue Inspector / Checking Inspector / Enquiry Inspector (Civil Supplies), or any Gazetted Officer of Vigilance and Enforcement Department of the State or any officer authorized in the behalf by the State Government not below the rank of a Sub-Inspector of Police may enter the premises of the fair price shop or any private premises where the scheduled commodities pertaining to Targeted Public Distribution System or other Government schemes are kept/positioned or found in transit and conduct inspection and seize any stocks of scheduled commodities, supply documents or books, accounts or other related document for the purpose of such inspection/seizure for contravention of the provisions of this Order. Officers of Legal Metrology Department, Team of Social Audit appointed by Commissioner of Civil Supplies are also empowered to inspect the fair price shop premises, in regard to weights and measures.” 5. In view of the above instructions and considering the statutory powers conferred upon the respondents under the Andhra Pradesh State TPDS 5 VS,J W.P.No.28957 of 2025 Control Order, 2018, though it is the case of respondents that the petitioner is involved in 31 6-A cases, it does not mean that they can interfere into the petitioner business activities without there being any complaint as against the petitioner’s Rice Mill. It has to be observed that each and every case under Section 6-A has to be enquired independently, but under the guise of pendency of 31 such cases, the respondents cannot interfere with the petitioner’s business activities without there being any complaint as against the petitioner. 6. In view of the same, the Writ Petition is disposed of directing the respondent Nos.9 & 10 not to interfere into the petitioner’s business activities until and unless there is any complaint is made against the petitioner. There shall be no order as to costs. __________________ JUSTICE V.SUJATHA Date: 24.11.2025 KGR