APHC010260822026 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) [3504] FRIDAY, THE EIGHTH DAY OF MAY TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY SIX PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE MAHESWARA RAO KUNCHEAM WRIT PETITION NO: 13553/2026 Between: 1. NEW LAKSHMI NARSIMHA HANDLING AND WAREHOUSE SERVICES, 194-A, GUNTAKAL- BELLARY HIGHWAY ROAD, NH-63, KONAKONDIA VILLAGE, VAJRAKARUR MANDAL,ANANTHAPURAMU DISTRICT, REP.BY ITS PARTNER V. SRINIVASULU REDDY ...PETITIONER AND 1. ANDHRA PRADESH STATE CIVIL SUPPLIES CORPORATION LIMITED APSCSCL, HEAD OFFICE 10- 152/1, ASHOK NAGAR, BANDAR ROAD, REP. BY ITS VICE CHAIRMAN-CUM-MANAGING DIRECTOR VIJAYAWADA, NTR DISTRICT-520007, 2. THE JOINT COLLECTOR CUM EXOFFICIO EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR, APSCSCL, ANANTHAPURAMU DISTRICT, ANANTHAPURAMU- 515001 3. THE DISTRICT CIVIL SUPPLIES MANAGER, APSCSCL, ANANTHAPURAMU DISTRICT, ANANTHAPURAMU- 515001 4. M/S SRI LAKSMI BALAJI WAREHOUSING AND HANDLING TRANSPORTING SERVICES, PLOT NO. 103, SAI SYAMALA NIVAS, SANTHOSH NAGAR, KURNOOL- 518003 REP. BY ITS MANAGING PARTNER, K. VENKATA RAMANA, 5. THE STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH, REP. BY ITS PRINCIPAL SECRETARY, CIVIL SUPPLIES DEPARTMENT, SECRETARIAT, VELAGAPUDI, AMARAVATI, GUNTUR DISTRICT-522238 ...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 a writ, order or direction particularly one in the nature of Writ of mandamus declaring the impugned orders of the 2ND respondent in the name of notice vide Lr.No.Mktg./FCI/TMCL/2025-26, dated 02.05.2026 directing the petitioner to handover the godown and stock to the 4TH respondent who has no manner of right whatsoever as there are no handling and storage orders issued by the corporation, without giving notice and opportunity in gross violation of principles of natural justice in violation of Article 14, 19 (1)(g) and 21 of Constitution of India and consequently set-aside aforesaid impugned orders of the 2nd respondent with a further direction to continue the petitioner as handling and storage contractor 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 leased to direct the respondents to continue the petitioner as handling and storage contractor by suspending the operation of impugned orders pf the 2"*^ respondent in the name of notice vide Lr.No.Mktg./FCI/TMCL/2025-26, dated 02.05.2026 and pass Counsel for the Petitioner: 1. K RATHANGA PANI REDDY Counsel for the Respondent(S): 1. MD SALEEM 2. GP FOR CIVIL SUPPLIES 3. 3 THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE MAHESWARA RAO KUNCHEAM WRIT PETITION NO: 13553 of 2026 The Court made the following Order: Instant Writ Petition has been filed by the petitioner under Article 226 of the Constitution of India is filed for the following relief: “.... to issue a writ, order or direction more particularly one in the nature of Writ of Mandamus declaring the impugned orders of the 2ND respondent in the name of notice vide Lr.No.Mktg./FCI/TMCL/2025-26, dated 02.05.2026 directing the petitioner to handover the godown and stock to the 4TH respondent who has no manner of right whatsoever as there are no handling and storage orders issued by the corporation, without giving notice and opportunity in gross violation of principles of natural justice in violation of Article 14, 19 (1)(g) and 21 of Constitution of India and consequently set-aside aforesaid impugned orders of the 2nd respondent with a further direction to continue the petitioner as handling and storage contractor and pass such other order …”. 2. Heard Sri K.Rathangapani Reddy, learned counsel for the petitioner, Sri Md.Saleem, learned Standing Counsel for respondent Nos.1 to 3 and Sri N.Ravi Prasad, learned counsel for the unofficial respondent No.4. 3. Conception of writ petition is that the impugned order dated 02.05.2026 issued by 2nd respondent is without any prior notice. 4 Learned counsel for the petitioner raised multiple grounds mainly violation of principles of natural justice. 4. Conversely, Sri Md.Saleem, learned Standing Counsel for respondent Nos.1 to 3 submits that in view of the complaint of the original owner of the premises, the authorities have passed the impugned order dated 02.05.2026. he also submits that as the respondent corporation is dealing with Public Distribution System (PDS) rice which is just and essential in the day to day works of general public and as such, there exists significance importance attached to the works of 2nd respondent corporation. 5. Sri N.Ravi Prasad, learned counsel for the unofficial respondent No.4 stating that filed vakalat today in the Registry, submits that after expiry of lease period of the petitioner, original owner of the property executed lease deed in favour of 4th respondent on 21.08.2025. 6. When this Court posed a specific query, Sri Md.Saleem, learned Standing Counsel submits that the impugned order dated 02.05.2026 is not disclosing the factum of prior notice before issuing it. He also further submits that as the main conception is violation of principles of natural justice, this Court may set aside 5 this order by leaving it open to the respondent corporation authorities to take appropriate steps, as per the procedure in vogue. 6. In the light of fair submission made by Sri Md.Saleem, learned Standing Counsel for respondent corporation and with the consent of learned counsel on both sides, and by duly considering the principles of natural justice enunciated by the Hon’ble Apex Court in Krishnadutt Awasthy Vs. State of Madhya Pradesh1 and also in Triveni Engineering and Industries Limited Vs. State of Uttar Pradesh and Others2, this Court is inclined to dispose of the Writ Petition, at the stage of admission itself, setting aside the Order dated 02.05.2026 passed by the 2nd respondent and granting liberty to the 2nd respondent corporation authorities to take appropriate steps, by issuing notice to all the stakeholders, after providing due opportunity to the respective parties, including to that of petitioner and 4th respondent as well as owner of the subject property, in accordance with the law. 1 (2025) 7 SCC 545 2 (2026) 2 SCC 729 6 7. Accordingly, the Writ Petition is disposed of. There shall be no order as to costs. Interlocutory applications, if any, pending shall stand closed. ____________________________________ JUSTICE MAHESWARA RAO KUNCHEAM Date: 08.05.2026 PSA