APHC010182892025 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) [3332] WEDNESDAY,THE FOURTH DAY OF FEBRUARY TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY SIX PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE RAVI CHEEMALAPATI WRIT PETITION NO: 9743/2025 Between: 1. RAMAVATHU SEVIYA NAIK,, S/O. THARUVURYA NAIK, AGE 53 YEARS, AYYANNAPALEM VILLAGE, BOLLAPALLI MANDAL PALNADU DISTRICT. ...PETITIONER AND 1. THE STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH, REP. BY ITS PRINCIPAL SECRETARY, CONSUMER AFFAIRS FOOD AND CIVIL SUPPLIES, SECRETARIAT, AMARAVATHI. 2. THE DISTRICT COLLECTOR, NARASAROPET, PALNADU DISTRICT. 3. THE JOINT COLLECTOR, NARASARAOPET, PALNADU DISTRICT. 4. THE REVENUE DIVISIONAL OFFICER, NARASAROPET, PALNADU DISTRICT. 5. THE TAHASILDAR, BOLLAPALLI BOLLAPALLI MANDAL PALNADU DISTRICT. ...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 to issue an appropriate writ, order or direction more 2 particularly one in the nature of Writ of Mandamus declaring the action of the 4th respondent in issuing the proceedings Rc. No. 308/2024-G, dated 17.03.2025 suspending the authorization of the petitioner as Fair price shop dealer of Fair Shop No. 0721001 Ayyanapalem Village Bollapalli Mandal.Palnadu District, Palnadu District without there being any valid reason, without considering the petitioners explanation and without providing a personal hearing as illegal, arbitrary and violative of principles of natural justice and violative of Articles 14, 19(1)(g) of the Constitution of India and contrary to the Essential Commodities Act and also violative of Andhra Pradesh State Targeted Public Distribution System (Control) Order 2018 and consequently set aside the same by directing the respondents to continue the petitioner to hold Shop No. 0721001 of Ayyanapalem Village Bollapalli Mandal,Palnadu District Palnadu District and to pass IA NO: 1 OF 2025 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 and to supply essential commodities to the petitioner's Fair Shop No. 0721001 of Ayyanapalem Village Bollapalli Mandal, th Palnadu District, Palnadu District by suspending the proceedings of the 4 respondent in Rc. No. 308/2024-G, dated 17.03.2025 pending disposal of the writ petition and to pass IA NO: 2 OF 2025 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 vacate the interim order dated on 21.04.2025 passed in I.A.No.1 of 2025 in W.P.No.9743 of 2025 and dismiss the Writ Petition and pass Counsel for the Petitioner: 1. MARELLA RADHA Counsel for the Respondent(S): 1. GP FOR CIVIL SUPPLIES 3 The Court made the following: ORDER: Questioning the proceedings dated 17.03.2025 issued by the 4th respondent vide Rc.No.308/2024-G suspending the petitioner’s authorization in respect of Fair Price Shop No.0721001, Ayyanapalem Village, Bollapalli Mandal, Palnadu District, the present writ petition is filed. 2. Heard Sri Nandipalle Venkatesh, learned counsel representing Smt Marella Radha, learned counsel for the petitioner and Sri Appasani Vineeth, learned Assistant Government Pleader for Civil Supplies. 3. Learned counsel for the petitioner while reiterating the contents of the writ affidavit would contend that the authorities, alleging variations in Sugar Packets found during inspection of the Fair Price shop, issued show cause notice, for which the petitioner submitted explanation, however, the authorities, without considering the explanation, in a mechanical way, suspended the authorization of the petitioner without giving reasons in violation of the orders passed by this Court in K.Prabhavathi vs. State of A.P.1, therefore, the impugned suspension order is liable to be set aside. Accordingly, prayed to allow the writ petition. 1 2020(6) ALD 209 4 4. Sri Appasani Vineeth, learned Assistant Government Pleader, justified the impugned order of suspension contending that as the authorities found variation in ground balance of commodities, suspended the Fair Price shop authorization of the petitioner, pending final enquiry, after following the procedure contemplated under law. He would further contend that the writ petition being meritless deserves dismissal. Accordingly, prayed to dismiss the writ petition. 5. Perused the material available on record and considered the submissions made by learned counsel for the parties. 6. The petitioner’s Fair Price shop dealership authorization was suspended pending enquiry. This Court vide orders dated 21.04.2025, suspended the impugned orders. 7. Clause 8(4)(2) of the Andhra Pradesh Targeted Public Distribution System (Control) Order, 2018, mandates 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 (03) months from the date of filing, keeping in view of the convenience of the cardholders and for smooth functioning of Targeted Public Distribution System. 8. It is fairly conceded by the learned Assistant Government Pleader that enquiry had not been completed so far. 5 9. In view of the above, without going into the merits of the matter, this Court is inclined to dispose of the writ petition by passing the following order: “The authorities shall conclude the enquiry at an earliest. Till conclusion of enquiry, the interim orders passed by this Court on 21.04.2025 shall continue.” 10. 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: 04th February, 2026 RKS