APHC010325742024 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) [3333] MONDAY,THE FIFTH DAY OF JANUARY TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY SIX PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SMT JUSTICE V.SUJATHA WRIT PETITION NO: 16363/2024 Between: 1.SMT D RAJA KUMARI, W/O LEELA MADHAVA RAO, AGED ABOUT 60 YEARS, OCC. FAIR SHOP DEALER, R/O. D. NO. 11-6-20, MUVVAVARI STREET, PANDURANGAPET, TENALI TOWN, GUNTUR DISTRICT. ...PETITIONER AND 1.THE STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH, REP. BY ITS SECRETARY, CONSUMER AFFAIRS AND CIVIL SUPPLIES DEPARTMENT, SECRETARIAT BUILDINGS, VELAGAPUDI, AMARAVATHI, GUNTUR DISTRICT. 2.THE JOINT COLLECTOR, GUNTUR DISTRICT. 3.THE SUB COLLECTOR, TENALI, GUNTUR DISTRICT. 4.THE TAHSILDAR, TENALI MANDAL, GUNTUR 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 topleased to issue a Writ of Mandamus or any other appropriate Writ Order or direction 2 VS,J W.P.NO.16363 OF 2024 declaring the action of the 3rd respondent in rejecting the representation for reinstate into as a permanent Fair Shop Dealer vide Shop No. 0787026 situated at Muvvavari street, pandurangapet, Tenali town, Guntur District vide endorsement Rc. No. 347/2022- A dated 24.07.2024 illegal, arbitrary and violation of principles of natural justice consequently set aside the orders passed by the 3rd respondent by vide Rc. No. 347/2022 - A dated 24.07.2024 and pass IA NO: 1 OF 2024 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 suspend the orders passed by the 3rd respondent vide Rc. No. 347/2022 - A dated 24.07.2024 by continuing the petitioner as a Fair Price Shop Dealer vide Shop No. 0787026 situated at Muvvavari street pandurangapet, Tenali town, Guntur District pending disposal of the above Writ Petition and 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 pleased to grant leave to Respondent No.3 to file counter affidavit in the above Writ Petition and pass Counsel for the Petitioner: 1.K SRINIVAS Counsel for the Respondent(S): 1.GP FOR CIVIL SUPPLIES The Court made the following: 3 VS,J W.P.NO.16363 OF 2024 ORDER: The present writ petition is filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, seeking the following reliefs: “...to issue a Writ of Mandamus or any other appropriate Writ Order or direction declaring the action of the 3rd respondent in rejecting the representation for reinstate into as a permanent Fair Shop Dealer vide Shop No. 0787026 situated at Muvvavari street, pandurangapet, Tenali town, Guntur District vide endorsement Rc. No. 347/2022- A dated 24.07.2024 illegal, arbitrary and violation of principles of natural justice consequently set aside the orders passed by the 3rd respondent by vide Rc. No. 347/2022 - A dated 24.07.2024...” 2. The case of the petitioner is that she was appointed as Fair Price Shop dealer of Shop No.0787026 situated at Muvva Vari Street, Pandurangapet, Tenali Town, Guntur District, and since the date of appointment, she has been distributing essential commodities to the cardholders without any remark whatsoever. 3. While so, due to heart attack, the petitioner left to Chicago in the month of June, 2019 for better treatment, after applying leave for two months and the same was granted. After returned to India, on the advice of local doctors, the petitioner was under necessary periodical medical checkups. Again, on the advice of local doctors, the petitioner went on leave for three months, by applying leave to the concerned authorities. Again, after coming 4 VS,J W.P.NO.16363 OF 2024 to India, she was effected by corona virus and was in isolation and as such, she extended her leave up to June, 2022. Thereafter, the petitioner made a representation to 4th respondent on 07.04.2022 enclosing the medical fitness certificate requesting to restore her authorization to enable her to distribute commodities to the card holders, but, no action has been taken on the said representation. Aggrieved by the same, the present writ petition came to be filed. 4. The 3rd respondent-Sub Collector, Tenali, filed counter, while admitting the dealership of the petitioner, specifically stated that the petitioner ceased to hold authorization for the subject shop by operation of law, since her prolonged absence beyond the permitted period under the Andhra Pradesh Targeted Public Distribution System (Control) Order, 2018 amounts to deemed resignation from dealership. The 3rd respondent stated that the petitioner has medical issues and under the guise of medical treatment, she remained absent for long periods on multiple occasions including travelling abroad for extended durations, which disrupted the administration of Public Distribution System in the locality and that medical hardship cannot be a ground to permit indefinite absence from a statutory assignment. The PDS 5 VS,J W.P.NO.16363 OF 2024 dealership is a public duty, and irregular attendance directly affects hundreds of cardholders, who depend on uninterrupted supply of essential commodities and due to her multiple spells of prolonged absence, cardholders suffered inconvenience, tagging had to be arranged and distribution schedules were disturbed, which resulted in serious administrative difficulties and complaints at the ground level. 5. The 3rd respondent further stated that if the petitioner with her medical illness is allowed to resume the shop at this stage, it may again result in frequent leave requests, stress-related absence and further disturbance to the PDS mechanism and from the administrative perspective and from the petitioner’s health perspective, it would not be advisable to permit her continuation, as the system may once again be disrupted due to her repeated medical contingencies. The respondent had followed the due process as per clause XII (ix) and (x) of the A.P. Targeted Public Distribution System (Control) Order, 2018 and acted strictly in accordance with law. 6. The 3rd respondent further contended that the decision taken by the respondent is not arbitrary, but after obtaining the ground level reports. In fact, the petitioner has no efficacious 6 VS,J W.P.NO.16363 OF 2024 remedy as she already availed the statutory remedy of filing an appeal on 15.10.2024 before the Joint Collector, which is numbered as Appeal No.3/2024-S2 and the same is pending consideration and suppressing the material fact deliberately, the petitioner approached this Hon’ble Court with unclean hands. When a statutory appeal is pending adjudication before a competent authority, the petitioner cannot directly invoke the extraordinary jurisdiction of this Court and on that ground alone, the writ petition is liable to be dismissed in limini on the ground of suppression of fact. 7. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned Assistant Government Pleader for Civil Supplies. 8. Perused the material on record. 9. A thorough scrutiny of the material on record would clearly show that under the guise of medical treatment, the petitioner proceeded on repeated long period of absence on multiple occasions including travelling abroad for extended durations and the same was causing disruption of the administration of Public Distribution System in the locality. It is also not in dispute that during the said leave period, a temporary arrangement was being 7 VS,J W.P.NO.16363 OF 2024 made to avoid disruption of administration of Public Distribution System. It is not dispute that the petitioner sought leave in multiple spells during 2019, 2022 and 2024 each time claiming medical treatment both in India and Abroad and such repeated and extended requests caused disruption of PDS system. 10. A perusal of the material on record would show that the petitioner made a representation on 02.12.2022, requesting for her reinstatement as a fair price shop dealer by taking into consideration her health condition. But, the respondent authorities, on examining the ground situation through field reports and timeline absence of the petitioner, basing on the reports submitted by the Assistant Supply Officer and as per the clauses of the Control Order, the 3rd respondent, vide his orders in Rc.No.347/2022-A, dated 04.10.2024, passed orders treating the period of absence of the petitioner as resignation and accordingly accepted the same. The fact remains that against the said orders, the petitioner already availed remedy of appeal in Appeal No.3/2024-S2 and the same is pending consideration before the competent authority. 11. Having regard to the facts and circumstances of the case and in view of the fact that the petitioner has already preferred an 8 VS,J W.P.NO.16363 OF 2024 appeal as against the orders of the 3rd respondent-Sub Collector Tenali, before the 2nd respondent-Joint Collector, Guntur District, this Court feels it appropriate to direct the petitioner to work out her remedies in the appeal, which is pending before the competent authority. As such, no relief can be granted as sought for. 12. Accordingly, the writ petition is disposed of, leaving it open to the petitioner to pursue her appeal said to have been pending before the competent authority and put forth her grievance as raised herein before the competent authority, who shall consider the same and pass appropriate orders in accordance with law, uninfluenced by the observations made herein. 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. _____________ V. SUJATHA, J Date: 05.01.2026 LSP