APHC010064042026 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH THURSDAY, THE TWENTY SIXTH DAY OF FEBRUARY TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY SIX THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE RAVI CHEEMALAPATI WRIT PETITION NO: Between: 1. SRI.PALASABNI ESWARAIAH, S/O LATE PALASANI SREERAMULU, AGED ABOUT 68 YEARS, R/O PERUMALLAPADU VILLAGE, CHEJERLA MANDAL, SPSR NELLORE DISTRICT 1. THE STATE OF AP, REP. BY ITS PRINCIPAL SECRETARY, CONSUMER AFFAIRS AND CIVIL SUPPLIES DEPARTMENT, SECRETARIAT BUILDINGS, VELAGAPUDI, AMARAVATI, GUNTUR DISTRICT - 522238. 2. THE DISTRICT COLLECTOR, NELLORE, SPSR NELLORE DISTRICT - 524001. 3. THE DISTRICT SUPPLY OFFICER, (DSO) NELLORE, SPSR NELLORE DISTRICT 4. THE REVENUE DIVISIONAL OFFICER RDO ATMAKUR DIVISION, SPSR NELLORE DISTRICT 5. THE TAHSILDAR, CHEJERLA MANDAL, SPSR NELLORE DISTRICT 524341. 6. SMT TALAPANENI AMMANNI, W/O TALAPANENI JAYANTULU NAIDU, R/O PERUMALLAPADU SPSR NELLORE DISTRICT IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) THURSDAY, THE TWENTY SIXTH DAY OF FEBRUARY TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY SIX PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE RAVI CHEEMALAPATI WRIT PETITION NO: 3971/2026 SRI.PALASABNI ESWARAIAH, S/O LATE PALASANI SREERAMULU, AGED ABOUT 68 YEARS, R/O PERUMALLAPADU VILLAGE, CHEJERLA MANDAL, SPSR NELLORE DISTRICT - 524341. ...PETITIONER AND THE STATE OF AP, REP. BY ITS PRINCIPAL SECRETARY, CONSUMER AFFAIRS AND CIVIL SUPPLIES DEPARTMENT, SECRETARIAT BUILDINGS, VELAGAPUDI, AMARAVATI, GUNTUR 522238. THE DISTRICT COLLECTOR, NELLORE, SPSR NELLORE DISTRICT THE DISTRICT SUPPLY OFFICER, (DSO) NELLORE, SPSR TRICT - 524001. THE REVENUE DIVISIONAL OFFICER RDO ATMAKUR DIVISION, SPSR NELLORE DISTRICT - 515751. THE TAHSILDAR, CHEJERLA MANDAL, SPSR NELLORE DISTRICT SMT TALAPANENI AMMANNI, W/O TALAPANENI JAYANTULU NAIDU, R/O PERUMALLAPADU VILLAGE, CHEJERLA MANDAL, SPSR NELLORE DISTRICT - 524341. ...RESPONDENT(S): IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH [3332] THURSDAY, THE TWENTY SIXTH DAY OF FEBRUARY THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE RAVI CHEEMALAPATI SRI.PALASABNI ESWARAIAH, S/O LATE PALASANI SREERAMULU, AGED ABOUT 68 YEARS, R/O PERUMALLAPADU VILLAGE, 524341. ...PETITIONER THE STATE OF AP, REP. BY ITS PRINCIPAL SECRETARY, CONSUMER AFFAIRS AND CIVIL SUPPLIES DEPARTMENT, SECRETARIAT BUILDINGS, VELAGAPUDI, AMARAVATI, GUNTUR THE DISTRICT COLLECTOR, NELLORE, SPSR NELLORE DISTRICT THE DISTRICT SUPPLY OFFICER, (DSO) NELLORE, SPSR THE REVENUE DIVISIONAL OFFICER RDO ATMAKUR DIVISION, THE TAHSILDAR, CHEJERLA MANDAL, SPSR NELLORE DISTRICT - SMT TALAPANENI AMMANNI, W/O TALAPANENI JAYANTULU VILLAGE, CHEJERLA MANDAL, ...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 to issue an appropriate Writ, Order, or Direction, more particularly one in the nature of a Writ of Mandamus, declaring the impugned action of the 4th respondent in not initiating any disciplinary proceedings in respect of the proceedings issued by the 5th respondent vide Rc.B.No.298 of 2025, dated 07.01.2026, which were issued pursuant to my representation submitted under PGRS bearing No. NLR202512171785, dated 17.12.2025, as illegal, arbitrary, and violative of the fundamental rights guaranteed under Articles 14, 19, and 21 of the Constitution of India, and as being contrary to the provisions of the Andhra Pradesh State Targeted Public Distribution System (Control) Order and consequently, direct the 4th respondent to initiate disciplinary proceedings in respect of the proceedings issued by the 5th respondent vide Rc.B.No.298 of 2025, dated 07.01.2026, which were issued pursuant to my representation submitted under PGRS bearing No. NLR202512171785, dated 17.12.2025 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 to direct the 4th respondent to initiate disciplinary proceedings in respect of the proceedings issued by the 5th respondent vide Rc.B.No.298 of 2025, dated 07.01.2026, which were issued pursuant to my representation submitted under PGRS bearing No. NLR202512171785, dated 17.12.2025, and to pass Counsel for the Petitioner: 1. P VENGALA REDDY Counsel for the Respondent(S): 1. GP FOR REVENUE 2. GP FOR CIVIL SUPPLIES 3. NAVULURU KRISHNA SAI 3 The Court made the following order: The grievance of the petitioner is that respondent No.4 has not initiated any disciplinary proceedings against the unofficial respondent with respect to the proceedings issued by respondent No.5 vide Rc.B.No.298 of 2025 dated 07.01.2026, which were issued pursuant to his representation submitted under PGRS bearing No.NLR202512171785, dated 17.12.2025. 2. Heard Sri B.R.S.Kalyan Reddy, learned counsel, representing Sri P.Vengal Reddy, learned counsel for the petitioner, Sri Vineeth Appasani, learned Assistant Government Pleader for Civil Supplies appearing for the official respondents and Sri Navuluri Krishna Sai, learned counsel for the unofficial respondent. 3. Learned counsel for the petitioner, in elaboration to what has been stated in the affidavit, contended that the petitioner had filed a petition through Public Grievance Redressal System (PGRS) seeking cancellation of license of the unofficial respondent in respect of Fair Price shop bearing No.0920011 on the ground that the license was obtained on the basis of a fake SSC certificate, despite the availability of eligible candidates. He further contended that the said shop is being used for election propaganda and that rice cardholders are being threatened with regard to voting. He further submitted that pursuant to the representation of the petitioner, respondent No.5 issued an endorsement, dated 07.01.2026 informing the petitioner that for the purpose of enquiry, notices have been issued to respondent No.6 and the enquiry report was sent to the Revenue Divisional Officer for taking further 4 action. He further submitted that despite the same, respondent No.4 has not initiated any disciplinary proceedings against the unofficial respondent in pursuance of the proceedings issued by respondent No.5. Hence, prayed to pass appropriate orders protecting the interest of the petitioner. 4. On the other hand, learned Assistant Government Pleader placed on record the written instructions of the Revenue Divisional officer dated 12.02.2026 and submitted that the petitioner filed an application through PGRS dated 17.12.2025 with a request to cancel the authorization granted in favour of the unofficial respondent on the ground that she had obtained the authorization on the basis of a fake SSC certificate. Thereupon, respondent No.5 issued a notice dated 22.12.2025 directing the unofficial respondent to attend the enquiry along with relevant documents. The unofficial respondent attended the enquiry and after conducting due enquiry, respondent No.5 submitted a report to the Revenue Divisional Officer, dated 07.01.2026. He further submitted that respondent No.5 instructed respondent No.4 to conduct a detailed enquiry and submit a detailed report and further action will be initiated in the matter strictly in accordance with law upon receipt of the said report. Despite knowing the said fact, the petitioner, with an intention to harass the officials, has filed the present frivolous Writ Petition. Hence, prayed to dismiss the Writ Petition. 5. Perused the material available on record and considered the submissions made by learned counsel for the parties. 5 6. Admittedly, the petitioner submitted an application through the Public Grievance Redressal Platform (PGRS) on 17.12.2025 seeking cancellation of the authorization granted in favour of the unofficial respondent on the allegation that the authorization was obtained on the basis of a fake SSC certificate. It is not in dispute that, pursuant to the said application, respondent No.5 issued a notice dated 22.12.2025 directing the unofficial respondent to attend the enquiry along with the relevant documents. Perusal of Endorsement issued by respondent No.4 shows that after conducting due enquiry, respondent No.5 submitted a report dated 07.01.2026 to the Revenue Divisional Officer. 7. Learned Assistant Government Pleader submitted that respondent No.5 has already instructed respondent No.4 to conduct a detailed enquiry and submit a detailed report, and that further action in the matter will be initiated strictly in accordance with law upon receipt of the said report. 8. In view of the above, it is evident that the authorities have already initiated enquiry on the petitioner’s representation and it is under process of consideration by the competent authorities. When the competent authorities have already commenced the enquiry and the matter is under consideration, the petitioner cannot invoke the extraordinary jurisdiction of this Court seeking a direction to initiate disciplinary proceedings. The Writ Petition appears to have been filed prematurely without awaiting the outcome of the enquiry being conducted by the competent authority, despite the petitioner knowing pretty 6 well about the said fact. Hence, this Court is of the view that the Writ Petition is devoid of merits and has been filed unnecessarily, when the matter is already under consideration before the competent authorities, thereby wasting the valuable time of this Court, as such, this Writ Petition is liable to be dismissed with costs. 9. Accordingly, the Writ Petition is dismissed with costs of Rs.10,000/- (Rupees Ten Thousand only) payable by the petitioner to the Andhra Pradesh High Court Legal Services Committee within a period of four (04) weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order and the petitioner shall file proof of payment/acknowledgment before the Registrar (Judicial). 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 26.02.2026 MP 7 173 THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE RAVI CHEEMALAPATI WRIT PETITION NO.3971 of 2026 26.02.2026 MP