APHC010574692025 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) [3333] THURSDAY, THE THIRTIETH DAY OF OCTOBER TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SMT JUSTICE V.SUJATHA WRIT PETITION NO: 29772/2025 Between: 1. P RAMA KRISHNA, S/O RATTAIAH AGE 36 YEARS, OCC FP SHOP DEALER OF SHOP NO.0707024, ORAVAKALLU VILLAGE ATCHAMPET MANDAL, PALANADU DIST. ...PETITIONER AND 1. THE STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH, REP.BY ITS PRINCIPLE SECRETARY CIVIL SUPPLIES DEPARTMENT, SECRETARIAT, VELAGAPUDI, GUNTUR DIST. 2. THE COLLECTOR CS, PALANADU DIST., AT NARASARAOPET. 3. THE REVENUE DIVISIONAL OFFICER, SATTENAPALLI TOWN, PALANADU DIST. 4. THE TAHSILDAR, ATCHAMPET MANDAL, PALANADU DIST. 5. THE DEPUTY TAHSILDAR CS, ATCHAMPET MANDAL, PALANADU DIST. 6. THE VILLAGE REVENUE OFFICER, ORAVAKALLU VILLAGE, ATCHAMPET MANDAL PALANADU DIST. 7. MR SK JOHNNY BASHA, THE DEPUTY TAHSILDAR (CS) (L/C) O/O ATCHAMPET MANDAL OFFICE ATCHAMPET TOWN, PALANADU DIST. 8. MR KOTA KRISHNA RAO, THE VILLAGE REVENUE OFFICER O/O 2 VS,J W.P.No.29772/2025 ATCHAMPET MRO OFFICE, ATCHAMPET TOWN, PALANADU DIST. ...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 or direction preferably writ of mandamus declaring the order issued by the 3rd respondent vide Rc.No.3315/2025-C dt 17-10-2025 suspending the petitioners authorization in respect of FP Shop No.0707024, Oravakallu Village, Atchampet Mandal, Palanadu Dist., by issuing show cause notice for suspension on the same day i.e., 17-10-2025 and without assigning any valid reasons and without following the procedure as contemplated under AP State Targeted Public Distribution System (Control) Order, 2018 and without assigning any valid reasons and without following the procedure as contemplated under AP State Targeted Public Distribution System (Control) Order, 2018 is illegal, arbitrary, and violative of principles of natural justice and consequentially set aside the impugned order dt 17-10- 2025 by directing the Respondents to continue petitioner as FP Shop dealer as usual, 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 Suspend the impugned order passed by the 3rd respondent vide Rc.No.3315/2025-C dt.17-10-2025 in respect of FP Shop No.0707024, Oravakallu Village, Atchampet Mandal, Palanadu Dist., by continuing the petitioner as dealer as usual,pending disposal of the writ petition. Counsel for the Petitioner: 1. M M M SRINIVASA RAO Counsel for the Respondent(S): 1. GP FOR CIVIL SUPPLIES The Court made the following: 3 VS,J W.P.No.29772/2025 ORDER: The present writ petition is filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India seeking the following relief: “…to issue a writ or direction preferably writ of mandamus declaring the order issued by the 3rd respondent vide Rc.No.3315/2025-C dt:17-10-2025 suspending the petitioner’s authorization in respect of FP Shop No.0707024, Oravakallu Village, Atchampet Mandal, Palnadu Dist., by issuing show cause notice for suspension on the same day i.e., 17-10-2025 and without assigning any valid reasons and without following the procedure as contemplated under AP State Targeted Public Distribution System (Control) Order, 2018 and without assigning any valid reasons and without following the procedure as contemplated under AP State Targeted Public Distribution System (Control) Order, 2018 is illegal, arbitrary, and violative of principles of natural justice and consequentially set aside the impugned order dt:17-10-2025 by directing the Respondents to continue petitioner as FP Shop dealer as usual, and pass any other or orders…” 2. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner as well as learned Assistant Government Pleader for Civil Supplies. 3. The petitioner was appointed as a permanent dealer for fair price shop No.0707024 at Oravakallu Village, Atchampet Mandal, Palnadu District in the year 2008 and the petitioner’s authorization is valid up to 31.03.2025 and the petitioner has also paid the renewal fee on 28.02.2025. 4. While the things stood thus, on 15.10.2025, the 5th respondent along with the 6th respondent visited the petitioner’s shop and verified the stock position and though there was no variation, they prepared a Panchanama alleging that there is variation in the stock. Thereafter, basing on a report submitted by the Deputy Tahsildar, dated 17.10.2025, the 4th respondent submitted a report to the 3rd respondent herein who in turn has issued a show cause notice on 17.10.2025 calling for explanation from the petitioner within 7 days of the said notice and issued impugned order of suspension on the same 4 VS,J W.P.No.29772/2025 day i.e., on 17.10.2025. The grievance of the petitioner is that the 3rd respondent, even without waiting for the explanation yet to be offered by the petitioner within the time frame fixed by him, has suspended the petitioner’s authorization pending enquiry on the same day i.e., on 17.10.2025. Challenging which the present writ petition is filed. 5. As rightly pointed out by the learned counsel for the petitioner, the 3rd respondent has issued show cause notice on 17.10.2025 calling for explanation from the date of receipt of copy of the said notice. However, on the same day, even without waiting for the explanation yet to be submitted by the petitioner, the 3rd respondent has suspended the petitioner’s authorization on the same day i.e., on 17.10.2025 which in fact is in violation of principles of natural justice. 6. In view of the same, the impugned proceedings, dated 17.10.2025, placing the authorization of the petitioner under suspension pending enquiry is set aside. However, the petitioner is directed to submit his explanation to the show cause notice, dated 17.10.2025, within a period of ten (10) days from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. Thereafter, the 3rd respondent shall consider the same and pass appropriate orders in accordance with law, within a period of four (4) weeks. It is needless to mention that till the disciplinary proceedings are finalized the respondents shall supply essential commodities to the petitioner’s fair price shop. 7. Accordingly, the Writ Petition is allowed. No order as to costs. Consequently, Miscellaneous Petitions, if any, pending shall stand closed. ______________________ JUSTICE V.SUJATHA Date: 30.10.2025 KAS 5 VS,J W.P.No.29772/2025 83 THE HONOURABLE SMT JUSTICE V.SUJATHA WRIT PETITION NO: 29772/2025 Date: 30.10.2025 KAS