APHC010607032025 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) [3333] MONDAY,THE SEVENTEENTH DAY OF NOVEMBER TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SMT JUSTICE V.SUJATHA WRIT PETITION NO: 31581/2025 Between: 1. THETI SRINIVASARAO, S/O. THENTI SOMESWARA RAO, AGED ABOUT 35 YEARS, OCC. F.P SHOP DEALER, F.P.SHOP NO.0525030, R/O. H.NO.4-88 GARUVU, NEAR GANDHI STATUE CENTRE, ADAVIKOLANU VILLAGE,NIDAMARRU MANDALAM, ELURU DISTRICT ...PETITIONER AND 1. THE STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH, REPRESENTED BY ITS PRINCIPAL SECRETARY TO GOVERNMENT, CIVIL SUPPLIES DEPARTMENT AT SECRETARIAT, VELAGAPUDI AMARAVATI, GUNTUR DISTRICT. 2. THE JOINT COLLECTOR, ELURU, ELURU DISTRICT. 3. THE REVENUE DIVISIONAL OFFICER, ELURU, ELURU DISTRICT. 4. THE TAHSILDAR, NIDAMARRU MANDAL, ELURU DISTRICT. 5. THE DEPUTY TAHSILDAR, NIDAMARRU MANDAL, ELURU 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 an appropriate Writ, order or direction, more particularly one in the nature of WRIT OF MANDAMUS to declaring the inaction of the 2 VS,J W.P.No.31581 of 2025 respondents Nos.2 to 5 in not restoring the petitioners Fair Price Shop authorization bearing Shop No. 0525030, situated at Adavikolanu Village, Nidamarru Mandal, Eluru District, despite the petitioner having remitted the fine amount imposed by the 3rd respondent-Revenue Divisional Officer, Eluru, vide proceedings Roc.No.e-788655/2017/C, dated 16.01.2025, as illegal, arbitrary, violative of the principles of natural justice, and contrary to the provisions of the Andhra Pradesh State Targeted Public Distribution System (Control) Order and consequently direct the respondents Nos.2 to 5 to forthwith restore the petitioners authorization for the aforesaid Fair Price Shop 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 Nos. 2 to 5 to release the essential commodities to the petitioner for Fair Price Shop No.0525030, situated at Adavikolanu Village, Nidamarru Mandal, Eluru District, for distribution to the eligible cardholders, by suspending the operation of the impugned proceedings, pending disposal of the writ petition and to pass Counsel for the Petitioner: 1. RAJU GUBBALA Counsel for the Respondent(S): 1. GP FOR CIVIL SUPPLIES 3 VS,J W.P.No.31581 of 2025 The Court made the following order: The present writ petition came to be filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India seeking the following relief: “…to issue an appropriate Writ, order or direction, more particularly one in the nature of WRIT OF MANDAMUS to declaring the inaction of the respondents Nos.2 to 5 in not restoring the petitioners Fair Price Shop authorization bearing Shop No. 0525030, situated at Adavikolanu Village, Nidamarru Mandal, Eluru District, despite the petitioner having remitted the fine amount imposed by the 3rd respondent-Revenue Divisional Officer, Eluru, vide proceedings Roc.No.e-788655/2017/C, dated 16.01.2025, as illegal, arbitrary, violative of the principles of natural justice, and contrary to the provisions of the Andhra Pradesh State Targeted Public Distribution System (Control) Order and consequently direct the respondents Nos.2 to 5 to forthwith restore the petitioners authorization for the aforesaid Fair Price Shop and pass such other order or orders as this Hon’ble Court may deem fit and proper in the circumstances of the case.” 2. The petitioner was appointed as a fair price shop dealer in the month of June, 2009 for the fair price shop No.0525030 situated at Adavikonalu village, Nidamarru Mandal, Eluru District. The Authorization of the petitioner has been extended from time to time. 3. While things stood thus, on 04.07.2017, the petitioner’s fair price shop was inspected by the officials of the revenue accompanied by vigilance Departments and have identified certain variation in the ground stock with the book balance. Thereafter the 2nd respondent issued a show cause notice calling for an explanation from the petitioner, for which the petitioner submitted 4 VS,J W.P.No.31581 of 2025 a detailed explanation duly clarifying all aspects of the alleged variations. Thereafter the 6A proceedings were also initiated on 25.11.2017 and imposed a fine equivalent to 50% of the value of the seized stock, amount to Rs.1,135/- against the petitioner. The petitioner has remitted said amount on 15.11.2019. 4. The grievance of the petitioner in the present writ petition is that though the he has been continuously making the representation since the date of remittance of said fine amount, the 3rd respondent has not restored the fair price shop in favour of the petitioner after remitting the fine amount. Thereafter after finalization of 6A proceedings, the 3rd respondent issued a show cause notice dated 03.01.2025, calling for explanation from the petitioner as to why the disciplinary proceedings should not be initiated as against the petitioner and as to why the authorization of the petitioner’s should not be cancelled, for which the petitioner has submitted his detailed explanation on 04.01.2025. Challenging the said action of the respondents in not restoring the petitioner’s fair shop after remitting the fine amount, way back in the year 2019 and as well as issuance of show cause notice dated 03.01.2025 after finalization of 6A proceedings by the 3rd respondent, present writ petition is filed. 5. Today, when the matter came up for hearing, the learned Assistant Government pleader furnished the copy of instructions of the 4th respondent dated 16.11.2025 wherein the facts as stated by the petitioner are reiterated. However, it is stated that the representation of the petitioner is resolved by linking authentication and updating data in e-pos device on 15.11.2025 to release the essential commodities to the petitioner’s for subject fair price shop. 5 VS,J W.P.No.31581 of 2025 6. In view of the fact that the E-pos Device has been updated in the name of the petitioner, this court of the opinion that no further cause will survive. However, the show cause notice which is issued by the 3rd respondent on 03.01.2025 is nothing but contrary to the procedure as under Control Order, 2018. In fact, the inspection over the subject fair price shop was conducted on 04.07.2017. Thereafter the Tahsildar ought to have submitted two reports one for initiating the disciplinary action and another for 6A proceedings. But, in the present case, it appears that after finalization of 6A proceedings in the year 2017 i.e., after a lapse of 8 years, present show cause notice was issued by the 3rd respondent on 03.01.2025 calling for explanation from the petitioner as to why his authorization cannot be cancelled solely basing on the inspection which was conducted on 04.07.2017, which admittedly is contrary to clause 20(i) of Control Order, 2018 as per which two separate reports are required which are to be submitted simultaneously. 7. In view of the same, this Writ Petition is allowed, setting aside the impugned proceedings dated 16.01.2025 passed by the 2nd respondent in Roc.No.e-788655/2017/C. There shall be no order as to costs. Consequently, Miscellaneous Petitions, if any, pending shall stand closed. ______________________ JUSTICE V.SUJATHA Date: 17.11.2025 MH/JAK 6 VS,J W.P.No.31581 of 2025 THE HONOURABLE SMT JUSTICE V.SUJATHA 7 VS,J W.P.No.31581 of 2025 151 WRIT PETITION NO: 31581/2025 Date: 17.11.2025 MH/JAK