\ IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH :: AMARAV (Special Original Jurisdiction) WEDNESDAY. THE NINETEENTH DAY OF FEBRUARY TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE PRESENT THE HONOURABLE MS JUSTICE B S BHANUMATHI WRIT PETITION NO: 2607 OF 2025 Between: V.Aswarthappa, S/o. Vemanna, Aged about 30 years, Occ: FP Shop Dealer of Shop No. 1256001, R/o. Pulamathi Village, Lepakshi Mandal, Sri Sathya Sai District Erstwhile Ananthapur District ...PETITIONER AND The State of Andhra Pradesh, Rep. by the Principal Secretary, Civil Supplies Department, Secretariat Buildings At Velagapudi, Amaravathi, Andhra Pradesh. The District Collector, Sri, Sathya Sai District at Puttaparthy Erstwhile Ananthapur District. The Joint Collector, Sri Sathya Sai District at Puttaparthy Erstwhile Ananthapur District. The Revenue Divisional Officer, Penukonda, Sri Sathya Sai District Erstwhile Ananthapur District. The Tahsildar, Lepakshi Mandal, Sri Sathya Sai District Erstwhile Ananthapur District. 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. ...RESPONDENTS 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 more particularly one in the nature of WRIT OF MANDAMUS declaring the action of the 3^^ and 4 respondents in not allotting the essential commodities to the F.P shops th V held by the petitioner at Pulamathi Village (Shop.No. 1256001) of Lepakshi Mandal, Sri Sathya Sai District Erstwhile Ananthapur District without there being any reason though the petitioner authorization is valid and subsisting is illegal, arbitrary 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 principles of natural justice and consequently direct the respondents to continue the petitioner to hold F.P. shop Dealership of Pulamathi Village (Shop.No. 1256001) of Lepakshi Mandal, Sri Sathya Sai District Erstwhile Ananthapur District. lA 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 to continue the petitioner as F.P. shop Dealer and to supply essential commodities to the petitioner’s fair price shop at Pulamathi Village (Shop.No.1256001) of Lepakshi Mandal, Sri Sathya Sai District Erstwhile Ananthapur District, pending disposal of Writ Petition. Counsel for the Petitioner: SRI P.NARAHARI BABU Counsel for the Respondents: GP FOR CIVIL SUPPLIES The Court made the following: ORDER V A APHC010051222025 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) [3311] WEDNESDAY, THE NINETEENTH DAY OF FEBRUARY TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE PRESENT THE HONOURABLE MS JUSTICE B S BHANUMATHI WRIT PETITION NO: 2607/2025 Between: ...PETITIONER V Aswarthappa AND ...RESPONDENT{S) The State Of Andhra Pradesh and Others Counsel for the Petitioner: 1.P NARAHARI BABU Counsel for the Respondent(S): 1.GP FOR CIVIL SUPPLIES The Court made the following Order: This writ petition is filed under Article 226 of Constitution of India seeking the following relief: “...pleased to issue a writ, order or direction more particularly one in the nature of Writ of Mandamus declaring the action of the 3 and 4**^ respondents in not allotting the essential commodities to the F.P shops held by the petitioner at Pulamathi Village (Shop.No.1256001) of Lepakshi Mandal, Sri Sathya Sai District Erstwhile Ananthapur District without there being any reason though the petitioner authorization is valid and subsisting is illegal, arbitrary and violative of Articles 14, 19(1)(g) of the Constitution of India and also violative of Andhra Pradesh State Targeted Public Distribution rd W.P.No.2607of2025 dt: 19.02.2025 2 System (Control) Order 2018 and principles of natural justice and consequently direct the respondents to continue the petitioner to hold F.P. shop Dealership of Pulamathi Village (Shop.No.1256001 of Lepakshi Mandal, Sri Sathya Sai District Erstwhile Ananthapur District and pass...” 02. The case of the petitioner is briefly as follows; The petitioner was appointed as a permanent dealer of the fair price shop No.1256001 of Pulamathi Village, Lepakshi Mandal, Sri Satya Sai District Erstehile Ananthapur District. Since then, he has been continuing his service without there being any remark and his authorization was renewed 29.03.2023. While so, on 08.01.2025, the staff of the 5*^^ respondent i.e., CSDT, M.R.I. and V.R.O. visited the petitioner’s fair price shop and conducted inspection and found the variation in the stock. Therefore, the authorities on seized the stock and handed over the same to the V.R.O. including the e-Pos and weighing machine. Based on the inspection report, the 4'*^ respondent herein issued show-cause notice vide Rc.No.63/2025/C, dated 25.01.2025, calling for an explanation from the petitioner. Pursuant to the same, the petitioner submitted explanation on 30.01.2025. But, the respondents are not considering the petitioner’s explanation due to local political pressure. Aggrieved by the same, the petitioner filed the present writ petition. 03. The learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that without there being any cancellation/ suspension of the dealership of the petitioner, the respondent authorities are not supplying commodities to the petitioner. He further submitted that the supply of essential commodities to the petitioner should not be stopped without following due process of law and placed reliance on the decision of this Court in Oletl Tirupathamma vs. District Supply Officer reported in 2002 (1) ALD 577, wherein it is stated as under: W.P.No.2607 of 2025 dt: 19.02.2025 3 % “15. It is one thing to say that when an order has been passed by the authority, the Court may pass an interim staying the operation thereof as a result whereof the dealer may carry on business, but it is another thing to say that a deliberate action in not supplying the essential commodities to an authorised dealer even though his authorisation or licence has not been suspended, should be allowed by this Court by refusing to grant a writ although in law he is entitled to. 16. A statutory authority, it is trite, must act within the four corners of the statute in terms of the statutory orders and procedure laid down to suspend the licence. As already noticed hereinbefore, the authorities under the relevant orders have power to suspend the authorisation or licence of the dealer. Without applying its mind and without taking recourse thereto, the Court should not normally permit the authorities, unless extraordinary situation exists, to allow them to do something indirectly, which they cannot do it directly. If a broad proposition to this effect is laid down, the same, in a given amount to abuse of the process of law. The High Court case may while exercising its jurisdiction under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, acts sentinel qui vive and thus it has to protect the citizen from arbitrary and capricious action of the executive. If the licensing authority themselves upon application of mind come to the conclusion that the irregularities committed by the fair price shop dealer would warrant suspension of his licence, it may do so. But, in considered opinion, the authority without taking recourse to the said action, cannot, refuse to supply the essential commodities. In the event an order of suspension of licence is passed, the authorities will have to make an alternative arrangement. But, in a of this nature, the card holders would be the worst sufferers . our case Hf W.P.No.2607 of 2025 dt: 19.02.2025 4 essential commodities would not be supplied to inasmuch their them at all.” Assistant Government Pleader placed on record the written respondent vide Rc.No.07/2025/A. dated 04. The learned instructions issued by the 5 and further submitted the petitioner’s explanation dated th 03.02.2025 30.01.2025 was pending for enquiry. has not been cancelled or Since the appointment of the petitioner suspended by following any due procedure of law by conducting any enquiry, fair price shop dealer as usual so long 05. the petitioner is entitled to continue as such appointment is in force. as Accordingly, the writ petition is disposed of and the respondent authorities are directed to supply the essential commodities to the petitioner requirements for such supply, so long as his appointment 06. on his complying the is in force. pending in this writ Consequently, Miscellaneous Petitions, if any petition shall stand closed. Sd/- A. VENUGOPALA RAO assistant registrar //TRUE COPY// N OFFICER S To State of Andhra 1 The Principal Secretary, Civil Supplies Department At Velagapudi, Amaravathi, Guntur - i District at Puttaparthy Erstwhile Pradesh Secretariat Buildings District. District Collector, Sri Sathya Sai Ananthapur District. (BY RPAD) 2. The 3. The Joint Collector, Sri Sathya Sai District at Puttaparthy Erstwhile Ananthapur District. (BY RPAD) The Revenue Divisional Officer, Penukonda, Sri Sathya Sai District Erstwhile Ananthapur District. (BY RPAD) The Tahsildar, Lepakshi Mandal, Sri Sathya Sai District Erstwhile Ananthapur District. (BY RPAD) One CC to Sri P.Narahari Babu, Advocate [OPUC] Two CCs to GP for Civil Supplies, High Court of Andhra Pradesh. [OUT] Three CD Copies. 4. 5. 6. 7. 8. gi HIGH COURT DATED:19/02/2025 ORDER jfo'F WP.No.2607 of 2025 1 2 1 FEB 2025 ^ . Current Section DISPOSING OF THE WRIT PETITION WITHOUT COSTS