APHC010034992026 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) [3332] MONDAY,THE SECOND DAY OF FEBRUARY TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY SIX PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE RAVI CHEEMALAPATI WRIT PETITION NO: 2251/2026 Between: 1. BEDIDHEPALLI VARALAKSHMI, W/O B.VENKATA NARAYANA, AGED 41 YEARS, FAIR PRICE SHOP DEALER FOR F P SHOP NO. 1209034 OF GANNEVARIPALLI VILLAGE, TADIPATRI MANDAL, ANANTHAPURAMU DISTRICT RIO POTULAYYA PALEM, TADIPATRI, ANANTHAPURAMU DISTRICT ...PETITIONER AND 1. THE STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH, REPRESENTED BY ITS PRINCIPAL SECRETARY, CONSUMER AFFAIRS, FOOD CIVIL SUPPLIES DEPARTMENT, AT SECRETARIAT, VELAGAPUDI, AMARAVATHI, GUNTUR DISTRICT -3 2. 2. THE REVENUE DIVISIONAL OFFICER, ANANTHAPURAMU S T D I 3. THE TAHSILDAR, TADIPATRI MANDAL, ANANTHAPURAMU DISTRICT ...RESPONDENT(S): 2 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 toleased to Issue a Writ of Mandamus or any other appropriate Writ or Writs, Order or Direction, declaring the action of the 2 Respondent in issuing the termination proceedings dated 19.01.2026 vide D1 CS12598/2025 to the petitioner as illegal and arbitrary voilation of principles of Natural Justice without any enquiry and affording any hearing opportunity and consequently set aside the same forthwith allow the petitioner to function as Fair Price Shop Dealer of F.P.Shop No. 1209034 of Gannevaripalli Village, Tadipatri Mandal, Ananthapuramu District, by regularly supplying essential commodities. 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 Interim directions to suspend the operation of the impugned termination proceedings dated. 19.01.2026 vide D1 CS1259812025 by directing the petitioner to allow the petitioner to function as Fair Price 12 Shop Dealer of F.P. Shop No. 1209034 of Gannevaripalli Village, Tadipatri Mandal, Ananthapuramu District, by regularly supplying essential commodities, pending disposal and pass Counsel for the Petitioner: 1. N RANGA REDDY Counsel for the Respondent(S): 1. GP FOR CIVIL SUPPLIES 3 The Court made the following order: Impugning the proceedings vide D1CS/2598/2025, dated 19.01.2026, issued by the 2nd respondent-Revenue Divisional Officer, terminating the petitioner’s temporary dealership in respect of Fair Price Shop No.1209034 of Gannevaripalli Village, Tadipatri Mandal, Ananthapuramu District, the present writ petition is filed. 2. Heard Sri N. Ranga Reddy, learned counsel for the petitioner and Sri Vineeth Appasani, learned Assistant Government Pleader for Civil Supplies. 3. Learned counsel for the petitioner, in elaboration to what has been stated in the affidavit, contended that the petitioner was appointed as Fair Price Shop dealer for the Shop No.1209034 of Gannevaripalli Village, Tadipatri Mandal, Ananthapuramu District, in the year 2024. Since then, the petitioner has been running the shop smoothly and efficiently and no complaints whatsoever have been received from any cardholder or from any authority. He further submitted that the 3rd respondent-Tahsildar, upon conducting inspection on 02.12.2025 and alleged to have found variations in the stocks, prepared panchanama and seized the 4 available stocks in the shop. Based on the said report, the 2nd respondent-RDO, issued show cause notice dated 10.12.2025 to the petitioner, framing four charges and inviting explanation. The petitioner submitted explanation on 26.12.2025 refuting the charges. He further submitted that without considering the said explanation, without affording any personal hearing and without conducting proper enquiry, the 2nd respondent had issued the impugned proceedings dated 19.01.2026 terminating the authorization of the petitioner as Fair Price Shop dealer. He contends that the respondent authorities have failed to supply a copy of the 4th respondent-Tahsildar’s report dated 02.12.2025 to the petitioner, particularly when the 2nd respondent based his decision by relying on the said proceedings. Non-supply of the said report along with the show-cause notice, particularly when reliance was placed on, it amounts to a clear violation of the principles of natural justice. As such, prayed to pass appropriate orders protecting the interest of the petitioner. 4. On the other hand, learned Assistant Government Pleader for Civil Supplies while justifying the orders of the 2nd respondent 5 submitted that there is neither illegality nor procedural irregularity in passing impugned order. He further submitted that the petitioner, instead of filing an appeal before the Collector (Civil Supplies), filed the present writ petition which is not maintainable and liable to be dismissed. He further submitted that in the event if this Court inclines to interfere, a liberty may be given to the authority concerned to take steps in accordance with law. 5. Perused the record and considered the submissions made by both the learned counsel. 7. The main grounds that have been raised and urged before this Court while questioning the impugned proceedings are that the authority concerned based its decision by relying on the Tahsildar’s report vide Rc.No.CS/635/2025, dated 02.12.2025, without furnishing a copy of the said report to the petitioner along with the show cause notice before asking for an explanation and no opportunity was provided to cross examine the Panchayatdars/ mediators whose statements were relied upon. 8. A perusal of the record would indicate that the respondent authorities have not supplied the Tahsildar’s report dated 02.12.2025 to the petitioner. Further, the enquiry was not 6 conducted as per the law and no opportunity was provided to the petitioner to cross examine the panchayatdars/mediators report. This Court in similar set of facts passed orders in W.P.No.36331 of 2025 by relying on the judgment of the Division Bench of Court in W.A.No.139 of 2025. In view of the same, order impugned is wholly unsustainable and contrary to the principle of natural justices and is liable to be set aside. 9. Accordingly, the impugned proceedings vide D1CS/2598/2025, dated 19.01.2026, issued by the 2nd respondent-RDO is hereby set aside and the RDO is directed to conduct a proper enquiry in accordance with law. Till then, the petitioner shall continue as fair price shop dealer.” 10. With the above direction, 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: 02.02.2026 ANS 7 258 THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE RAVI CHEEMALAPATI WRIT PETITION NO: 2251/2026 Date: 02.02.2026 ANS