APHC010268752023 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH THURSDAY, THE FIFTH DAY OF FEBRUARY TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY SIX THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE RAVI CHEEMALAPATI WRIT PETITION NO: 13825/2023 Between: 1. SRI AMMA BHAGAVAN SELF HELP GROUP, LAVETEPALEM, LAVERU MANDAL, SRIKAKULAM DISTRICT. REP. BY ITS ORGANISER SMT. I. KRISHNA KUMARI, W/O RAMANA, AGED ABOUT 42 YEARS, R/O LAVETEPALEM VILLAGE, H/O LAVERU GRAM PANCHAYAT, LAVERU MANDAL, SRIKAKULA 1. THE STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH, CONSUMER AFFAIRS, FOOD 8S CIVIL SUPPLIES DEPARTMENT, SECRETARIAT, AMARAVATHI, GUNTUR DISTRICT, ANDHRA PRADESH. REP BY ITS PRINCIPAL SECRETARY 2. THE COLLECTOR CIVIL SUPPLIES, SRIKAKULAM, DISTRICT. 3. THE REVENUE DIVISIONAL OFFICER, SRIKAKULAM, SRIKAKULAM DISTRICT. 4. THE TAHSILDAR, LAVERU MANDAL, SRIKAKULAM DISTRICT. 5. INDIRA SELF HELP GROUP, REP. BY ITS ORGANISER SMT. I. VENKATA LAXMI, W/O JANARDHAN RAO, AGED ABOUT 39 YEARS, R/O LAVETEPALEM VILLAGE, LAVERU MANDAL, SRIKALCULAM DISTRICT. IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) THURSDAY, THE FIFTH DAY OF FEBRUARY TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY SIX PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE RAVI CHEEMALAPATI WRIT PETITION NO: 13825/2023 SRI AMMA BHAGAVAN SELF HELP GROUP, LAVETEPALEM, LAVERU MANDAL, SRIKAKULAM DISTRICT. REP. BY ITS ORGANISER SMT. I. KRISHNA KUMARI, W/O RAMANA, AGED ABOUT 42 YEARS, R/O LAVETEPALEM VILLAGE, H/O LAVERU GRAM PANCHAYAT, LAVERU MANDAL, SRIKAKULAM DISTRICT ...PETITIONER AND THE STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH, CONSUMER AFFAIRS, FOOD 8S CIVIL SUPPLIES DEPARTMENT, SECRETARIAT, AMARAVATHI, GUNTUR DISTRICT, ANDHRA PRADESH. REP BY ITS PRINCIPAL THE COLLECTOR CIVIL SUPPLIES, SRIKAKULAM, THE REVENUE DIVISIONAL OFFICER, SRIKAKULAM, SRIKAKULAM THE TAHSILDAR, LAVERU MANDAL, SRIKAKULAM DISTRICT. INDIRA SELF HELP GROUP, REP. BY ITS ORGANISER SMT. I. VENKATA LAXMI, W/O JANARDHAN RAO, AGED ABOUT 39 EARS, R/O LAVETEPALEM VILLAGE, LAVERU MANDAL, SRIKALCULAM DISTRICT. ...RESPONDENT(S): IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH [3332] THURSDAY, THE FIFTH DAY OF FEBRUARY THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE RAVI CHEEMALAPATI SRI AMMA BHAGAVAN SELF HELP GROUP, LAVETEPALEM, LAVERU MANDAL, SRIKAKULAM DISTRICT. REP. BY ITS ORGANISER SMT. I. KRISHNA KUMARI, W/O RAMANA, AGED ABOUT 42 YEARS, R/O LAVETEPALEM VILLAGE, H/O LAVERU M DISTRICT ...PETITIONER THE STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH, CONSUMER AFFAIRS, FOOD 8S CIVIL SUPPLIES DEPARTMENT, SECRETARIAT, AMARAVATHI, GUNTUR DISTRICT, ANDHRA PRADESH. REP BY ITS PRINCIPAL THE COLLECTOR CIVIL SUPPLIES, SRIKAKULAM, SRIKAKULAM THE REVENUE DIVISIONAL OFFICER, SRIKAKULAM, SRIKAKULAM THE TAHSILDAR, LAVERU MANDAL, SRIKAKULAM DISTRICT. INDIRA SELF HELP GROUP, REP. BY ITS ORGANISER SMT. I. VENKATA LAXMI, W/O JANARDHAN RAO, AGED ABOUT 39 EARS, R/O LAVETEPALEM VILLAGE, LAVERU 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 Writ of Mandamus, declaring the impugned proceedings in Rc No. 523/2023/CS dated 19.05.2023 issued by the 3rd respondent in terminating the petitioner as in-charge of F.P Shop dealer and appointing the 5th respondent as in-charge dealer for F.P shop No. 0106003 of Lavetepalem H/o Laveru Village (Laveru-III Depot) Laveru Mandal, Srikakulam District until further orders as being illegal, arbitrary, and contrary to the judgments of the Apex court and the High Courts and set aside the same and consequently to direct the respondents No. 2 to 4 to continue the petitioner herein as in-charge dealer of F.P shop No. 0106003 of Lavetepalem H/o Laveru Village, (Laveru- III Depot), Laveru Mandal, Srikakulam District, till the regular appointment is made and to pass IA NO: 1 OF 2023 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 No. 2 to 4 to continue the petitioner as in-charge dealer of F.P Shop No. 0106003 of Lavetepalem H/o Laveru Village, (Laveru¬III Depot), Laveru Mandal, Srikakulam District, by releasing stocks to the petitioner, by suspending the impugned proceedings in Rc No. 523/2023/CS dated 19.05.2023 issued by the 3rd respondent, pending disposal of the writ petition. 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 vacate the interim order dated 15.06.2023 in W.P.No. 13825 of 2023 and dismiss the Writ Petition and pass Counsel for the Petitioner: 1. TADDI NAGESWARA RAO Counsel for the Respondent(S): 1. RAMBABU KOPPINEEDI 2. GP FOR CIVIL SUPPLIES 3 The Court made the following order: Assailing the order of respondent No.3 in proceedings vide Rc.No.523/2023 CS/Dated 19.05.2023 whereby the petitioner, who is the organizer of ‘Amma Bhavani Self Help Group’ was terminated from the post of in-charge of Fair Price shop dealer and respondent No.5 was appointed as in- charge dealer of Fair Price shop No.0106003 of Lavetipalem, H/o Laveru village (Laveru-III Deport), Laveru Mandal, Srikakulam District, the present Writ Petition is filed. 2. Heard Sri Taddi Nageswararao, learned counsel for the petitioner, Sri Vineeth Appasani, learned Assistant Government Pleader for Civil Supplies appearing for the official respondents and Sri T.Raghu, learned counsel, representing Sri Rambabu Koppineedi, 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 was appointed as temporary dealer vide proceedings dated 24.03.2015 issued by respondent No.3. He further submitted that when the Joint Collector, Srikakulam issued proceedings dated 30.07.2019 replacing the petitioner with respondent No.5, the petitioner filed Writ Petition No.11855 of 2019 and the same was allowed on 31.03.2021 by setting aside the said proceedings. He further submitted that surprisingly, respondent No.3 again issued the impugned proceedings replacing the petitioner with respondent No.5 as in-charge dealer of the subject shop. He further submitted that without conducting any enquiry and 4 without issuing any show cause notice, respondent No.3 issued the impugned proceedings which is in violation of the principles of natural justice and cannot be sustained in the eye of law. Hence, prayed to allow the Writ Petition. 4. On the other hand, learned Assistant Government Pleader for Civil Supplies contended that based a complaint given by some of the villagers alleging irregularities in the maintenance of Fair Price shop, and on the recommendation of respondent No.4-Tahsildar, respondent No.3 passed the impugned order. Hence, there is no irregularity in issuing the impugned proceedings. Hence, prayed to dismiss the Writ Petition. 5. Learned counsel for the unofficial respondent submitted that based on the complaints made by the villagers, the petitioner was terminated, however, in view of the interim order granted by this Court, the dealership of the petitioner was restored again by removing respondent No.5. 6. Perused the material available on record and considered the submissions made by learned counsel for the parties. 7. 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 temporary dealer and thereafter, she was terminated from the dealership of the subject shop and respondent No.5 was appointed in that place. Admittedly, no notice or opportunity was given to the petitioner, no enquiry was conducted against her and her authorization has not been suspended as on today. 5 8. In similar set of facts, a coordinate Bench of this Court, in Writ Petition No.14864 of 2019 dated 18.02.2021, held as follows: “… even though the petitioner is a temporary fair price shop dealer, simply by saying that there are allegations against the temporary fair price shop dealer, she cannot be replaced by another temporary dealer. If there are allegations against the petitioner, the respondents may issue show cause notice and follow the procedure as contemplated under the A.P. State Targeted Public Distribution System (Control) Order, 2018.” In view of the facts and circumstances of the case and taking the decision referred supra into consideration, the impugned proceedings issued by respondent No.3, whereby the petitioner was simply replaced with respondent No.5, without conducting any enquiry and without suspending or cancelling the authorization of the petitioner, are not sustainable in law and are liable to be set aside. 9. Accordingly, the writ petition is allowed by setting aside the proceedings of the Revenue Divisional Officer, Srikakulam ine Rc.No.523/2023/CS/Dated 19.05.2023. However, this order does not preclude the respondent authorities from taking appropriate action against the petitioner in accordance with law, if contravened any of the provisions of the Control Order, 2018 or the conditions of the authorization. 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 05.02.2026 MP 6 249 THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE RAVI CHEEMALAPATI WRIT PETITION NO.13825 of 2023 05.02.2026 MP