POKURI RAMA CHANDRA RAO v. THE STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH
WP/1634/2026 · 2026-01-20
Ravi Cheemalapati
body2026
DailyLaw.ai
[ 2026 DAILYLAW 14473 (AP) · dailylaw.ai ]
DailyLaw.ai
[ 2026 DAILYLAW 14473 (AP) · dailylaw.ai ]
Judgment text
Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.
APHC010005832026
IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) [3332] WEDNESDAY,THE TWENTY FIRST DAY OF JANUARY TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY SIX PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE RAVI CHEEMALAPATI WRIT PETITION NO: 1634/2026 Between:
1. POKURI RAMA CHANDRA RAO, S/O. KESAVULU, AGED 65 YEARS, FP SHOP DEALER, SHOP NO.0845010, AMMANABROLU VILLAGE, N.G PADU MANDAL, PRAKASAM DISTRICT.523180
...PETITIONER AND
1. THE STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH, REP. BY ITS PRINCIPAL SECRETARY,
CIVIL SUPPLIES, SECRETARIAT AT VELAGAPUDI,
AMARAVATHI, GUNTUR DISTRICT 522237
2. THE COLLECTOR AND DISTRICT MAGISTRATE, PRAKASAM DISTRICT, ONGOLE 524001
3. THE COLLECTORCS, PRAKASAM DISTRICT, ONGOLE 524001
4. THE REVENUE DIVISIONAL OFFICER, ONGOLE, PRAKASAM DISTRICT 524001
5. THE TAHSILDAR, PRAKASAM DISTRICT
2
NAGALUPPLAPADU CMDC 524001
6. THE ENFORCEMENT DEPUTY TAHSILDAR, ONGOLE, PRAKASAM DISTRICT 524001
...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 Direction, more particularly one in the nature of Mandamus, to declaring the in action of 4th respondent-R.D.O. Ongole, who has not conclude disciplinary proceedings even though 90 days is completed. is wholly illegal, arbitrary and opposed to the spirit of Judgments of this Honbie High Court and also against the mandatory provisions of Control Orders and also violate of principals of natural justice and without jurisdiction and directed the respondents to restore the authorization of petitioner and consequently to direct the respondents to continue the petitioner as FP Shop dealer. Shop No 0845010 of Ammanabrolu Village, Nagalluppalapadu Mandal, Prakasam District, and pass 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 pleased to direct respondents to supply essential commodities to petitioner's F.P. shop, pending disposal of the above Writ Petition and pass Counsel for the Petitioner:
1. Alapati Vivekananda Counsel for the Respondent(S):
1. GP FOR CIVIL SUPPLIES
3
The Court made the following order:
To declare the action of the 4th respondent-Revenue Divisional Officer in not concluding the disciplinary proceedings within the stipulated period of ninety (90 days) as per the Control Orders, as illegal and arbitrary, the present writ petition is filed.
2. Heard Sri Alapati Vivekananda, learned counsel for the petitioner and Sri Vineeth Appasani, learned Assistant Government pleader for Civil Supplies.
3.
Learned counsel for the petitioner, while reiterating the contents of the affidavit, submitted that the petitioner was appointed as a fair price shop dealer bearing shop No.0845010 of Ammanabrolu Village, Nagalluppalapadu Mandal, Prakasam District, in the year 2009 and has been distributing commodities to the card holders without any compliant till date. He further submitted that the inspecting authorities conducted an inspection of the petitioner’s shop on 11.02.2025 and without considering the submissions of the petitioner, erroneously concluded that they were variations in the stocks and prepared a false inspection report. However, pending disciplinary enquiry, the petitioner authorization has been suspended temporarily.
4
He further submitted that as per the A.P. State Targeted Public Distribution System (Control Orders, 2018), disciplinary proceedings are required to be concluded within a period of three (03) months. However, despite the lapse of the stipulated period, no orders have been passed. In those circumstances, the petitioner was constrained to file the present writ petition. As such, prayed to pass orders directing the respondents to restore the authorization of the petitioner.
4. Learned Assistant Government Pleader did not refute the
submissions of learned counsel for the petitioner that the stipulated period for concluding the enquiry is three (03) months and the said period has been elapsed and that the enquiry is still pending.
5. Perused the record and considered the submission of both the learned counsel.
6. For adjudicating the subject issue, clause 8 (4)(2) of the Control Orders, 2018, is relevant and extracted for quick reference:
“Provided further that the appointing authority shall dispose the disciplinary case filed against the fair price shop dealers as early as possible, preferably within a period of three (3) months
5
from the date of filing, keeping in view of the convenience of the cardholders and for smooth functioning of Targeted Public Distribution System.”
7. It is not in dispute that the disciplinary enquiry against the petitioner has not been concluded within the stipulated period of three (03) months as prescribed under the Control Orders, 2018. When the enquiry is not concluded within the time prescribed, suspension of the dealership of the petitioner beyond the said period is whole unsustainable. The authorities cannot sleep over the enquiry for indefinite period particularly when the authorities have suspended the petitioner’s authorization temporary dealership. If they could not conclude the enquiry within stipulated period, it is appropriate to restore the authorization of the petitioner.
8. In view of the same, to meet the ends of justice, this Court, without going into the merits and demerits of the case, is inclined to dispose of the writ petition by passing the following order:
“The authorization of the petitioner as a Fair Price Shop dealer bearing shop No.0845010 of Ammanabrolu Village, Nagalluppalapadu Mandal, Prakasam District shall stand
6
restored, subject to the outcome of the enquiry pending before the Revenue Divisional Officer.”
7. Accordingly, the Writ Petition is disposed of. There shall be no order as to costs.
As a sequel, miscellaneous applications, pending if any, shall stand closed. _____________________________
JUSTICE RAVI CHEEMALAPATI
Date: 21.01.2026 ANS
7
140 THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE RAVI CHEEMALAPATI
WRIT PETITION NO: 1634/2026 Date: 21.01.2026 ANS