APHC010083082026 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) [3332] THURSDAY,THE NINETEENTH DAY OF FEBRUARY TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY SIX PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE RAVI CHEEMALAPATI WRIT PETITION NO: 4756/2026 Between: 1. SMT KONDRU VIJAYA LAKSHMI, W/O APPARAO, AGED 36 YRS, D.NO.6-28 , F.P.SHOP NO.0181085, ADITYANAGAR KHAZIPETA VILLAGE, SRIKAKULAM ...PETITIONER AND 1. THE STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH, REP., BY ITS PRINCIPAL SECRETARY (CIVIL SUPPLIES) SECRETARIAT, VELAGAPUDI, AMARAVATHI-522237 2. THE REVENUE DIVISIONAL OFFICER, R.D.O., OFFICE, SRIKAKULAM-532001 3. THE JOINT COLLECTOR, JOINT COLLECTOR'S OFFICE, SRIKAKULAM-532001 4. THE DIVISIONAL ADMINISTRATIVE OFFICER, REVENUE DIVISIONAL OFFICE, SRIKAKULAM-532001 5. SMT SAI PRATHYUSHA, W/O NOT KNOWN, AGED 45 YRS REVENUE DIVISIONAL OFFICER (RDO) R.D.O., OFFICE, SRIKAKULAM-532001 ...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 2 may be pleased topleased to Issue a Writ or Order or Direction more particularly one in the nature of a Writ of Mandamus declaring the action of the 2nd Respondent in passing the Impugned Order RC.No.107/2026 CSDt.05-02-2026 F.P.Shop No. 0181085 Served on the Petitioner on 12-02-2026 without enclosing the Inspection Report even though there is a Writ Petition No.14597/2025 is pending for finalizaiton and the said impugned notice was issued by the 5th Respondent without application by misusing the official capacity only taking personal revenge as against the Petitioner as the petitioner filed earlier Contempt Case No.1887/2025 is notthing but totally Illegal, Unlawful Violaiton of Article 14,19,21 of the Constitution of India , Violation of Principles of Natural Justice Consequently to Set-aside the Impugned Order RC.No.107/2026 CSDt.05-02-2026 F.P.Shop No. 0181085 by Allowing the Writ Petition 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 Pleased to pass an Order to STAY of the Operation of the Impugned Order RC.No.107/2026 CSDt.05-02-2026 F.P.Shop No. 0181085 pending disposal of the main Writ Petition and pass Counsel for the Petitioner: 1. RAVURI LEELA SAI SAMPATH Counsel for the Respondent(S): 1. GP FOR CIVIL SUPPLIES The Court made the following: 3 ORDER: Impugning the notice dated 05.02.2026 issued by the 2nd respondent without enclosing the inspection report and without indicating that the notice was issued for cancellation or suspension of authorization in respect of Fair Price Shop No.0181085, Adityanagar, Khazipeta Village, Srikakulam, the present writ petition is filed. 2. Heard Sri Ravuri Leela Sai Sampath, learned counsel for the petitioner and Sri Vineeth Appasani, learned Assistant Government Pleader for Civil Supplies for the respondents. 3. Learned counsel for the petitioner while reiterating the contents of the affidavit contended that the impugned show cause notice has been issued without mentioning as to what purpose the said show cause notice has been issued i.e., either for cancellation of the authorization of the petitioner or for suspension. The show cause notice is as vague as itself for which an explanation cannot be submitted. In view of the same, the said show cause notice is liable to be set aside, accordingly, prayed to set aside the same and allow the writ petition. 4. On the other hand, Sri Vineeth Appasani, learned Assistant Government Pleader for Civil Supplies submitted that the writ is not maintainable as against the issuance of show cause notice, as such, prayed to dismiss the writ petition. 4 5. Perused the record and considered the submissions made by the learned counsel for the parties. 6. A Show cause notice vide Rc.No.107/2026 CS dated 05.02.2026 issued by the 2nd respondent has been impugned in this writ petition. As rightly contended by the learned Assistant Government Pleader for Civil Supplies, ordinarily writ does not lie against mere issuance of show cause of notice. Entertaining writ petition against show cause notice dehorse the limit of Writ Jurisdiction. As held by the Hon’ble Apex Court in Union of India v. Kunisetty Satyanarayana1, only very rare and exceptional cases, if it is found to be wholly without jurisdiction or for some other reason, if it is wholly illegal, Court can exercise power of judicial review at the stage of show cause notice/charge memo. 7. A perusal of the impugned show cause notice shows that the authorities have sought an explanation from the petitioner as to why disciplinary action should not be taken against the petitioner for contravening the provisions of Control Order, 2018. The petitioner can as well submit her explanation in detail, raising all the grounds that are raised before this Court. Instead of doing so, the petitioner had filed the present writ petition. 8. In view of the above circumstances, this Court is inclined to dispose of the writ petition giving liberty to the petitioner to submit a detailed 1 (2006) 12 SCC 28 5 explanation to the show cause notice dated 05.02.2026 and even can ask the authorities to supply the material. 9. 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: 19th February, 2026 Note: Issue CC by 20.02.2026 B/o JLV 6 21 THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE RAVI CHEEMALAPATI WRIT PETITION NO: 4756/2026 Date: 19th February, 2026 7 Note: Issue CC by 20.02.2026 B/o JLV