Research › Search › Judgment

High Court of Andhra Pradesh · body

2025 DAILYLAW 56578 (AP)

Burra Rama Krishna, v. The State of Andhra Pradesh,

WP/1397/2025 · 2025-11-24

V Sujatha

body2025

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

APHC010025932025 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) [3333] TUESDAY, THE TWENTY FIFTH DAY OF NOVEMBER TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SMT JUSTICE V.SUJATHA WRIT PETITION NO: 1397/2025 Between: 1. BURRA RAMA KRISHNA,, S/O NAGESHWARA RAO, AGED ABOUT 23 YEARS, R/O D.NO.3-4B, SIVALAYAM STREET KODAVALI VILLAGE, GOLLAPROLU MANDAL, KAKINADA DISTRICT. ...PETITIONER AND 1. THE STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH, CIVIL SUPPLIES DEPARTMENT, SECRETARIAT BUILDING, SECRETARIAT, VELAGAPUDI, GUNTUR DISTRICT, REP. BY ITS PRINCIPAL SECRETARY. 2. THE COMMISSIONER, CIVIL SUPPLIES DEPARTMENT, GOVERNMENT OF ANDHRA PRADESH, VIJAYAWADA. 3. THE DISTRICT COLLECTOR CIVIL SUPPLIES, KAKINADA DISTRICT AT KAKINADA. 4. THE REVENUE DIVISIONAL OFFICER, KAKINADA DIVISION, KAKINADA 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, order or a direction more particularly one in the nature of Writ of Mandamus declaring the action of the 4th respondent in Notifying dated 1.1.2025 the F.P.Shop No.0408020, Kodavali Village 2 VS,J W.P.No.1397 of 2025 Gollaprolu Mandal, Kakinada District under BC-A category on permanent basis, without following the existed roster points is illegal arbitrary, unjust, unconstitutional. violation of Article 14 of the Constitution of India and also violation of instructions issued by the 2nd respondent through Proceedings CCS. Ref. No.21/1/2024 dated 11.11.2024 and also violation of G.O.Ms.No.32 dated 03.12.2018 and consequently set aside the same in so far as F.P.Shop No.0408020, Kodavali Village, Gollaprolu Mandal, Kakinada District is concerned, by directing the respondents to re-notify the same with the roster points existed prior to the notification 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 stay of all further proceedings pursuant to the Notification dated 1.1.2025 on the file of the 4th respondent in calling for applications for appointment to the post of Fair Price Shop Dealer vide F.P.Shop No.0408020, Kodavali Village, Gollaprolu Mandal, Kakinada District pending disposal of the writ petition Counsel for the Petitioner: 1. V V N NARAYANA RAO Counsel for the Respondent(S): 1. GP FOR CIVIL SUPPLIES 3 VS,J W.P.No.1397 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 a writ, order or a direction more particularly one in the nature of Writ of Mandamus declaring the action of the 4th respondent in Notifying dated 1.1.2025 the F.P Shop No.0408020, Kodavali Village, Gollaprolu Mandal, Kakinada District, under BC-A category on permanent basis, without following the existed roster points is illegal, arbitrary, unjust, unconstitutional, violation of Article 14 of the Constitution of India and also violation of instructions issued by the 2nd respondent through Proceedings CCS.Ref.No.21/1/2024, dated 11.11.2024 and also violation of G.O.Ms.No.32 dated 03.12.2018 and consequently set aside the same in so far as F.P.Shop No.0408020 Kodavali Village. Gollaprolu Mandal. Kakinada District is concerned. by directing the respondents to re-notify the same with the roster points existed prior to the notification and to pass such other order or orders ….” 2. During hearing, learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the issue involved in this writ petition, which pertains to roster points, is squarely covered by the order of this Court passed in Writ Petition No.31508 of 2024 & batch, dated 24.11.2025 and requested to pass a similar order in this writ petition also. The same is not disputed by the learned Assistant Government Pleader for Civil Supplies representing the respondents. The operative portion of the said order, reads as under: “5. As the said roster points were prepared behind the back of the petitioners, this Court, instead of going into merits of the case, feels it appropriate to dispose of all writ petitions by directing the concerned Revenue Divisional Officer / Appointing Authority to exhibit change of roster points by way of a notice affixed on the notice board of the jurisdictional office of the Tahsildar and as well as the Revenue Divisional Officer, which would be visible to each and every person, 4 VS,J W.P.No.1397 of 2025 so as to enable the effected fair price shop dealers to raise objections, if any, before the concerned authorities within a period of fifteen (15) days from the date of exhibiting the said notice in the notice boards. After receiving the objections from the fair price shop dealers, the concerned Revenue Divisional Officer/ Appointing authority shall consider the same and pass appropriate orders within a period of two (02) weeks thereafter. Consequently, the concerned Revenue Divisional Officer/Appointing Authority shall proceed further for appointment of a permanent fair price shop dealer, by way of issuing a fresh notification. 6. In view of the same, the impugned notifications pertaining to the petitioner’s Fair Price Shop are set aside with a liberty to Revenue Divisional Officer/Appointing Authority to issue a fresh notification after following the above procedure. 7. Accordingly, these Writ Petitions are allowed.” 3. In view of the same, for the reasons alike in the aforesaid order, this Writ Petition is also allowed in terms of the common order dated 24.11.2025 passed by this Court in W.P. No. 31508 of 2024 and batch. There shall be no order as to costs. 4. Registry is directed to attach a copy of the order in Writ Petition No.31508 of 2024 & batch dated 24.11.2025, to this order. There shall be no order as to costs. As a sequel, Interlocutory Applications pending, if any, shall stand closed. __________________ JUSTICE V.SUJATHA Dated: 25.11.2025 KGR