APHC010529892026 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) WEDNESDAY, THE 7th DAY OF OCTOBER 2026 PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE K SREENIVASA REDDY WRIT PETITION NO: 28831 OF 2026 Between: Smt.N.Deepa, W/o T.Venkateswarlu Age. 36 years, Occ. F.P. Shop dealer for Shop No.1024011, Vethalathaduku Village Narayanavanam Mandal, Tirupathi Dist. PIN. 517581 ...Petitioner AND 1. State of Andhra Pradesh, rep.by its Principle Secretary Civil Supplies Department, Secretariat, Velagapudi, Guntur Dist.-522503 2. The Joint Collector CS, Tirupathi Dist., at Tirupathi.-517503 3. The Revenue Divisional Officer, Srikalahasthi Division, Tirupathi Dist Dist.-517644 4. The Tahsildar, Narayanavanam Mandal, Tirupathi Dist. -517581 5. Smt D Sandhya, W/o D.Sankhar FP Shop dealer for Shop No.1024011 R/o Vethalathaduku Village, Narayana Mandal, Tirupathi Dist. -517581 ...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 to issue Writ Order or Orders or a Direction more particularly one in the nature of Writ of Mandamus declaring the impugned order passed by the 3rd respondent vide Roc. D/281/2026 dt. 21-7-2026 suspending the petitioner's authorization in 2 respect of the FP Shop No.1024011, Vethalathaduku Village Narayanavanam Mandal, Tirupathi Dist., without assigning any valid reasons and without following the procedure as contemplated under AP State Targeted Public Distribution System (Control) Order,2018 apart from violation of the principles of natural justice and consequently set aside the impugned order dt. 21-07-2026 by directing the Respondents to continue petitioner as FP Shop dealer as usual, IA NO: 1 OF 2026 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 Suspend the impugned order passed by the 3rd respondent vide Roc.D/281/2026 dt:21-7-2026 in respect of FP Shop No.1024011, Vethalathaduku Village Narayanavanam Mandal, Tirupathi Dist., by continuing the petitioner as dealer as usual, pending disposal of the writ petition. Counsel for the Petitioner: M M M SRINIVASA RAO Counsel for the Respondents: VENKATASUBBAIAH V Counsel for the Respondents:GP FOR CIVIL SUPPLIES The Court made the following order: 3 THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE K SREENIVASA REDDY WRIT PETITION NO: 28831 of 2026 ORDER Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned Assistant Government Pleader for Civil Supplies appearing for the respondents. 2. This Writ Petition is filed seeking the following relief: “….to issue Writ Order or Orders or a Direction more particularly one in the nature of Writ of Mandamus declaring the impugned order passed by the 3rd respondent vide Roc. D/281/2026 dt. 21-7-2026 suspending the petitioner's authorization in respect of the FP Shop No.1024011, Vethalathaduku Village Narayanavanam Mandal, Tirupathi Dist., without assigning any valid reasons and without following the procedure as contemplated under AP State Targeted Public Distribution System (Control) Order,2018 apart from violation of the principles of natural justice and consequently set aside the impugned order dt. 21-07- 2026 by directing the Respondents to continue petitioner as FP Shop dealer as usual.…” 3. Heard Sri M.M.M.Srinivasa Rao, learned counsel for the petitioner, the learned Assistant Government Pleader for 4 Civil Supplies, appearing for the official respondents and Sri V.Venkata Subbaiah, learned counsel for 5th respondent. 4. The petitioner is the permanent dealer of Fair Price (FP) Shop No. 1024011, located at Vethalathaduku Village, Narayanavanam Mandal, Tirupati District. The authorization for the said shop was duly issued by the competent authority under Clause 8 of the Andhra Pradesh State Targeted Public Distribution System (Control) Order, 2018, and remains valid up to 31-03-2027. 5. While matters stood thus, on 03-02-2026 at about 10:00 a.m., the Mandal Revenue Inspector along with the Village Revenue Officer (VRO) inspected the subject shop and alleged certain stock variations. At the material time, the petitioner was hospitalized at Narayanavanam due to severe fever and had requested her brother-in-law to look after the shop temporarily. Thereafter, the respondents did not allow the petitioner to run the shop, without issuing any show-cause notice or suspension order. Challenging the said action, the petitioner preferred W.P. No. 9934 of 2026, which was disposed of, by this Court on 20- 04-2026 with a direction to the authorities to supply essential 5 commodities to the petitioner's FP shop forthwith. Pursuant thereto, 3rd respondent issued a show-cause notice dated 01- 06-2026, to which the petitioner submitted her explanation on 06-06-2026. However, without considering the said explanation, 3rd respondent suspended her authorization vide the impugned order dated 21-07-2026 without releasing the stock, compelling the petitioner to file a Contempt Case, in C.C. No. 3110 of 2026. It is contended that the impugned suspension order does not disclose any independent reasons for suspending the authorization. Hence, this Writ Petition. 6. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that despite the orders passed by this Court in W.P. No. 9934 of 2026, the respondent authorities failed to restore the authorization of the shop in favour of the petitioner. He further submits that although the petitioner submitted an explanation to the show-cause notice, the respondent authorities, without assigning any valid reasons and in total disregard of the established legal procedure, suspended the petitioner's authorization with immediate effect until further orders. 6 7. Learned Assistant Government Pleader for Civil Supplies fairly concedes that the regular inquiry against the petitioner has not yet been concluded. 8. In view of the aforesaid facts and circumstances, since the explanation submitted by the petitioner was not objectively considered by the respondent authorities, and as the balance of convenience lies entirely in favour of the petitioner and the enquiry is not concluded within a period of three (3) months from the date of its institution under Clause 8(4)(2) of the Andhra Pradesh Targeted Public Distribution System (Control) Order, 2018, this Court deems it appropriate to hold that the impugned suspension order is legally unsustainable and is liable to be set aside. 9. Accordingly, the Writ Petition is allowed and the impugned order dated 21-07-2026 passed by 3rd respondent is hereby set aside. The respondent authorities are directed to conclude the disciplinary inquiry strictly on merits and in accordance with the law within a period of six (06) weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. Till such time the enquiry is concluded, the respondent authorities are directed to 7 restore the subject Fair Price shop in favour of the petitioner forthwith and resume the regular supply of essential commodities. There shall be no order as to costs. As a sequel, miscellaneous applications, pending, if any, shall also stand closed. JUSTICE K. SREENIVASA REDDY Date: 07.10.2026. Note: Issue C.C. in one week. B/o. PAB/YCH 8 THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE K SREENIVASA REDDY WRIT PETITION NO: 28831 of 2026 DATE: 07.10.2026 PAB/YCH