PAPHC010146642026 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH WEDNESDAY, THE FIFTEENTH DAY OF APRIL TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY SIX THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE RAVI CHEEMALAPATI WRIT PETITION NO: 8187/2026 Between: 1. OM PRAKASH REDDY, S/O. G. RAMALINGA REDDY, AGED 35 YEARS, OCC F.P. SHOP DEALER, F.P. SHOP NO. 1227046, JANGAMREDDIPALLI VILLAGE, NARPALA MANDAL, ANANTHAPURAMU DISTRICT. 1. THE STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH, REP. BY ITS PRINCIPAL SECRETARY, CONSUMER AFFAIRS, FOOD AND CIVIL SUPPLIES DEPARTMENT, SECRETARIAT, AMARAVATHI, GUNTUR DISTRICT 522238. 2. THE DISTRICT COLLECTOR, ANANTHAPURAMU, ANANTHAPURAMU DISTRICT 3. THE JOINT COLLECTOR, ANANTHAPURAMU, ANANTHAPURAMU DISTRICT-515001. 4. THE REVENUE DIVISIONAL OFFICER, ANANTHAPURAMU, ANANTHAPURAMU DISTRICT 5. THE TAHSILDAR, NARAPALA MANDAL, ANANTHAPURAMU DISTRICT-515425. 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 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) WEDNESDAY, THE FIFTEENTH DAY OF APRIL TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY SIX PRESENT HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE RAVI CHEEMALAPATI WRIT PETITION NO: 8187/2026 OM PRAKASH REDDY, S/O. G. RAMALINGA REDDY, AGED 35 YEARS, OCC F.P. SHOP DEALER, F.P. SHOP NO. 1227046, JANGAMREDDIPALLI VILLAGE, NARPALA MANDAL, ANANTHAPURAMU DISTRICT. ...PETITIONER AND THE STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH, REP. BY ITS PRINCIPAL SECRETARY, CONSUMER AFFAIRS, FOOD AND CIVIL SUPPLIES DEPARTMENT, SECRETARIAT, AMARAVATHI, GUNTUR DISTRICT THE DISTRICT COLLECTOR, ANANTHAPURAMU, ANANTHAPURAMU DISTRICT-515001. THE JOINT COLLECTOR, ANANTHAPURAMU, ANANTHAPURAMU THE REVENUE DIVISIONAL OFFICER, ANANTHAPURAMU, ANANTHAPURAMU DISTRICT-515001. THE TAHSILDAR, NARAPALA MANDAL, ANANTHAPURAMU ...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 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH [3332] WEDNESDAY, THE FIFTEENTH DAY OF APRIL HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE RAVI CHEEMALAPATI OM PRAKASH REDDY, S/O. G. RAMALINGA REDDY, AGED 35 YEARS, OCC F.P. SHOP DEALER, F.P. SHOP NO. 1227046, JANGAMREDDIPALLI VILLAGE, NARPALA MANDAL, ...PETITIONER THE STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH, REP. BY ITS PRINCIPAL SECRETARY, CONSUMER AFFAIRS, FOOD AND CIVIL SUPPLIES DEPARTMENT, SECRETARIAT, AMARAVATHI, GUNTUR DISTRICT- THE DISTRICT COLLECTOR, ANANTHAPURAMU, THE JOINT COLLECTOR, ANANTHAPURAMU, ANANTHAPURAMU THE REVENUE DIVISIONAL OFFICER, ANANTHAPURAMU, THE TAHSILDAR, NARAPALA MANDAL, ANANTHAPURAMU ...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 2 pleased to issue a Writ of mandamus or any other appropriate writ order or direction declaring the orders vide No.DICS/1683/2025 dt.28.02.2026 issued by the 4th respondent in canceling the petitioners F.P. Shop authorization in respect of F.P. Shop No.1227046 Jangamreddipalli Village, Narpala Mandal, Ananthapuramu District without affording of personal hearing, without conduct an independent enquiry. without following any sort of procedure is illegal, arbitrary and set aside the same, and consequently direct the respondents to continue the petitioner as F.P Shop dealership of F.P.Shop No.1227046, Jangamreddipalli Village Narpala Mandal, Ananthapuramu District and to 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 to direct the respondents to continue the petitioner as F.P Shop Dealer of F.P Shop No.1227046 of Jangamreddipalli Village, Narpala Mandal, Ananthapuramu District by suspending the orders vide No.DICS/1683/2025 dt.28.02.2026 issued by the 4th respondent, pending disposal of the writ petition and to pass Counsel for the Petitioner: 1. N ASWARTHA NARAYANA Counsel for the Respondent(S): 1. GP FOR CIVIL SUPPLIES 3 The Court made the following order: Challenging the proceedings issued by respondent No.4 in D1CS/1683/2025, dated 28.02.2026 cancelling the petitioner’s authorization in respect of Fair Price shop No.1227046, Jangamreddipalli village, Narpala Mandal, Ananthapuramu District, without affording of personal hearing, without conducting an independent enquiry and without following procedure, the present Writ Petition is filed. 2. Heard Sri N.Aswartha Narayana, learned counsel for the petitioner and Sri Vineeth Appasani, learned Assistant Government Pleader for Civil Supplies appearing for the respondents. 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 to the subject shop on permanent basis. Basing on the report submitted by respondent No.5-Tahsildar dated 06.08.2025, respondent No.4-Revenue Divisional Officer issued a show cause notice dated 20.03.2025 alleging variation in stocks, to which the petitioner submitted his explanation dated 30.08.2025 stating that the alleged shortage was only 83 kgs and that the stock was very much available, and that there was no alleged irregularity of diversion of stock in any mode. However, the authorities seized the Fair Price shop, though no cardholder had lodged even a single complaint with regard to distribution of stock. Thereafter, respondent No.4 passed order dated 03.10.2025 placing the petitioner’s shop authorization under suspension. Assailing the said suspension order, the petitioner filed 4 W.P.No.31948 of 2025 and this Court disposed of the said Writ Petition directing respondent No.4 to complete the enquiry pending against the petitioner within a period of two months from the date of receipt of the order, in accordance with the Control Order 2018, by duly affording an opportunity of hearing to the petitioner. He further submitted that respondent No.4, instead of conducting a proper enquiry, passed the impugned order dated 28.02.2026 cancelling the petitioner’s Fair Price shop authorization. He further submitted that respondent No.4 failed to examine any officer concerned who visited the petitioner’s Fair Price shop, and no records or documents were furnished to substantiate the allegations. He further submitted that no witnesses were examined to discharge the initial burden on the respondents and no opportunity was afforded, thereby violated the principles of natural justice. Hence, prayed to set aside the impugned orders and direct the respondents to continue the petitioner’s Fair Price shop authorization, failing which, the petitioner would be put to serious irreparable loss and hardship. 4. On the other hand, learned Assistant Government Pleader, while placing on record the written instructions of the Revenue Divisional officer, Ananthapuramu vide Rc.No.D1CS/1683/2025 dated 09.04.2026 submitted that during inspection, variations were found between the Complete Stock Register and the ground balance. The officials have seized the physical balance of 568.450kgs rice and 100 sugar ½ kg packets, E-pos machine and electronic weighing scale after duly conducting panchanama in the presence of mediators. He further submitted that basing on the report of Tahsildar, it 5 was found that there is prima facie evidence to initiate disciplinary action against the petitioner for the alleged irregularities. He further contended that a show cause notice had been issued and the petitioner submitted his explanation, however the same was not found convincing, in exercise of the powers vested under Clause 8(4) of APSTPDS (Control Order) 2018, the petitioner’s authorization was suspended pending enquiry for passing final orders. He further submitted that pursuant to the orders of this Court in Writ Petition No.31948 of 2025, a notice was issued to the petitioner directing him to appear before the Revenue Divisional officer on 03.01.2026 at 11.00A.M with relevant records. The counsel for the petitioner attended the enquiry and submitted an explanation on behalf of the petitioner. He further submitted that the variation in stock was to the extent of 44.71%, which is not permissible as per clause 29(a) of the APSTPDS (Control) Order, 2018 and therefore, the petitioner’s authorization was cancelled. He further submitted that only after issuance of notice, conducting an enquiry in accordance with the provisions of Control Order, 2018 and upon considering the explanation submitted by the petitioner, the impugned order cancelling the Fair Price shop authorization was passed. He further submitted that Village Revenue Officer is presently distributing the essential commodities as an alternative arrangement to avoid inconvenience to the cardholders. He further submitted that the Writ Petition deserves no consideration as there are no merits. Hence, prayed to dismiss the Writ Petition even without any counter. 6 5. Perused the material available on record and considered the submissions made by learned counsel for the parties. 6. As could be seen from the submissions made by learned counsel for the parties and the material available on record, the petitioner was appointed as a permanent dealer to the subject shop and his authorization was cancelled by the impugned proceedings. 7. It is not in dispute that variations in stock were noticed during inspection and a panchanama was conducted. It is also not in dispute that a show cause notice was issued to the petitioner and the petitioner submitted his explanation. 8. Pursuant to the earlier orders passed by this Court in W.P No.31948 of 2025, respondent No.4 was directed to complete the enquiry in accordance with the provisions of the Control Order, 2018, by duly affording an opportunity of hearing to the petitioner. However, there is nothing on record to show that a proper and independent enquiry was conducted in compliance with the said directions. 9. Though the learned Assistant Government Pleader for Civil Supplies Department contended that pursuant to the directions of this Court, notice was issued to the petitioner and the counsel for the petitioner attended the enquiry, there is no material to show that any witnesses or the officers, who conducted the inspection, were examined in the presence of the petitioner. 7 10. Admittedly, no notice was issued to the petitioner after getting the report/remarks from the Tahsildar. If the said report formed part of the basis for cancellation of authorization of the petitioner, non-supply of such report/remarks to the petitioner would amount to violation of principles of natural justice. Mere issuance of notice and receipt of explanation would not satisfy the requirement of a fair enquiry. Since the impugned proceedings are ex facie illegal and unsustainable and having been issued in clear violation of the principles of natural justice and without conducting proper enquiry, the same are liable to be set aside. 11. Moreover, the impugned order does not reflect proper consideration of the explanation submitted by the petitioner nor does it disclose any independent reasoning based on evidence. The same appears to have been passed in a mechanical manner. 12. In view of the foregoing discussion, this Court is of the view that the matter requires fresh consideration by respondent No.4 after strictly adhering to the principles of natural justice. By virtue of reasons stated supra, no counter is required to be invited as the impugned order is ex facie illegal and passed in clear violation of the principles of natural justice in as much as no basic enquiry was conducted as per provisions of the Control Order, 2018, therefore, the impugned order is liable to be set aside. 13. Accordingly, the writ petition is allowed by setting aside proceedings of respondent No.4 in D1CS/1683/2025, dated 28.02.2026. The matter is 8 remanded to respondent No.4 for fresh consideration/proper enquiry and for passing a reasoned order in accordance with law. Till such time, the petitioner shall be permitted to continue as the Fair Price shop dealer for the subject shop .There shall be no order as to costs. As a sequel thereto, interlocutory applications pending, if any in the Writ Petition, shall also stand closed. ____________________________ JUSTICE RAVI CHEEMALAPATI 15.04.2026 MP 9 172 THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE RAVI CHEEMALAPATI WRIT PETITION NO.8187 of 2026 15.04.2026 MP