APHC010339092025 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) [3332] WEDNESDAY, THE TWENTY FIFTH DAY OF FEBRUARY TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY SIX PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE RAVI CHEEMALAPATI WRIT PETITION NO: 17234/2025 Between: P Venkata Reddy ...PETITIONER AND The State Of Andhra Pradesh and Others ...RESPONDENT(S) Counsel for the Petitioner: 1. M SRIKANTH Counsel for the Respondent(S): 1. GP FOR CIVIL SUPPLIES The Court made the following order: This writ petition is filed questioning the orders dated 23.05.2025 passed by respondent no.3 vide Rc.H/1008/2024 suspending the petitioner’s authorization in respect of FP Shop No.0825023 situated in Pavuluru Village, Inkollu Mandal, Bapatla District. 2. Heard Sri M.Srikanth, learned counsel for the petitioner and Sri Appasani Vineeth, learned Assistant Government Pleader for Civil Supplies. 3. Sri M.Srikanth, learned counsel, while reiterating the contents of the writ affidavit would contend that, when the authorities have suspended the petitioner’s authorization vide proceedings dated 27.01.2025 in respect of subject shop, he filed W.P.No.4259 of 2025 which was disposed of by this Court on 24.02.2025 directing the 2nd respondent to pass final order by holding enquiry as per law within three weeks from the date of receipt of copy of order failing which the proceedings dated 27.01.2025 stands set aside. Inspite of the said direction, the authorities have not concluded the enquiry within the stipulated time as such, the suspension order dated 27.01.2025 stood revoked. He further submitted that, while so, the authorities have again passed another order (impugned) dated 23.05.2025 suspending the petitioner’s authorization, pending final enquiry. He would further contend that, in the said circumstances, in order to protect the interest of the petitioner, this Court has granted interim stay of impugned order on 10.07.2025. As such prayed to pass orders treating interim orders as final orders. 4. Sri Appasani Vineeth, learned Assistant Government Pleader, justified the impugned order of suspension contending that, as the petitioner committed certain irregularities in running fair price shop, the authorities have suspended the F.P.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 FP shop dealership authorization was suspended pending enquiry. This Court vide orders dated 10.07.2025, suspended the impugned orders directing the respondents to continue the petitioner as Fair Price Shop Dealer until further 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 (3) 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. 9. In view of the above, without going into the merits of the matter, the writ petition can be disposed of with the following direction: “The authorities shall conclude the enquiry at an earliest. Till conclusion of enquiry, the interim orders passed by this Court on 10.07.2025 shall continue.” Accordingly, the writ petition is disposed of. No costs. Pending miscellaneous petitions, if any, shall stand closed. RAVI CHEEMALAPATI,J BRS