APHC010495092024 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) [3332] SATURDAY,THE THIRTY FIRST DAY OF JANUARY TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY SIX PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE RAVI CHEEMALAPATI WRIT PETITION NO: 25502/2024 Between: 1. MUDE HANUMAN NAIK,, S/O. RAMLA NAIK, AGED ABOUT 50 YEARS, OCC. DEALER OF THE FAIR PRICE SHOP DEALER OF SHOP NO. 1150026, SUGALI TANDA VILLAGE OF PANDIKUNTA, GALIVEEDU MANDAL, ANNAMAYYA DISTRICT. ...PETITIONER AND 1. THE STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH, REP. BY ITS PRINCIPAL SECRETARY TO GOVERNMENT, CIVIL SUPPLIES DEPARTMENT, SECRETARIAT BUILDINGS, VELAGAPUDI, GUNTUR DISTRICT. 2. THE JOINT COLLECTOR, ANNAMAYYA DISTRICT, ANNAMAYYA. 3. THE REVENUE DIVISIONAL OFFICER, GALIVEEDU MANDAL, ANNAMAYYA DISTRICT, 4. THE TAHSILDAR, GALIVEEDU MANDAL, ANNAMAYYA DISTRICT. 5. THE DEPUTY TAHSILDAR, CIVIL SUPPLIES, M.L.S POINT, L.R PALLI MANDAL, ANNAMAYYA DISTRICT. 6. THE MANDAL REVENUE OFFICER, GALIVEEDU MANDAL, 2 ANNAMAYYA DISTRICT. 7. THE VILLAGE REVENUE OFFICER, GALIVEEDU MANDAL, ANNAMAYYA 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 under Article 226 of constitution of India more particularly one in the nature of Writ of Mandamus declaring the action of the respondent in not allotting the commodities for distribution for the card holders as arbitrary and illegal, contrary objectives of the provisions of the Andhra Pradesh State Targeted Public Distribution System (Control) Orders, 2018 and contrary to the well-established legal principles apart from being violative of the fundamental and Constitutional rights guaranteed to me under Articles 21 and 300-A of the Constitution of India and consequently direct the respondents to supply the commodities to me pending subsistence of the authorization the same 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 may be pleased to continue me the fair price shop dealer and release the commodities in my favor for as distribution to the card holders with immediate effect as there is no adverse proceedings warranting the stoppage supply of commodities to the card holders, pending disposal of the above Writ Petition and pass Counsel for the Petitioner: 1. PAPUDIPPU SASHIDAR REDDY Counsel for the Respondent(S): 1. GP FOR CIVIL SUPPLIES The Court made the following: 3 ORDER: The grievance of the petitioner is that the respondents stopped supplying essential commodities to the petitioner and not allowing him to function as Fair Price Shop Dealer of Fair Price Shop No.1150026 of Pandikunta Village, Galiveedu Mandal, Annamayya District. 2. Heard Sri Papudippu Sashidhar Reddy, learned counsel for the petitioner and Sri Vineeth Appasani, learned Assistant Government Pleader for Civil Supplies. 3. Sri Papudippu Sashidhar Reddy, learned counsel for the petitioner, while reiterating the contents of the writ affidavit would contend that the authorities stopped supplying essential commodities to the Fair Price Shop of the petitioner. He would further contend that pursuant to the interim orders passed by this Court on 07.04.2025 the respondent authorities restored supply of stocks. He would further contend that stoppage of supply of essential commodities without suspension or cancellation of the Fair Price Shop authorization is illegal and arbitrary. Accordingly, prayed to allow the writ petition. 4. Sri Vineeth Appasani, learned Assistant Government Pleader, fairly conceded that the authorities cannot stop supply of essential commodities, unless the Fair Price shop authorization of the petitioner is either suspended or cancelled and in the instant case there was neither 4 suspension nor cancellation of the authorization and the authorities, if intend, would take steps in accordance with law against the irregularities, if any, committed by the petitioner. 5. Perused the material available on record and considered the submissions made by learned counsel for the parties. 6. As rightly contended by the learned counsel for the petitioner and fairly conceded by the learned Assistant Government Pleader, there is neither suspension nor cancellation of the Fair Price shop authorization of the petitioner. Therefore, stoppage of supply of essential commodities for being distributed to the cardholders allocated to the Fair Price shop of the petitioner is unsustainable. 7. The record discloses that this Court vide interim orders dated 07.04.2025 directed the authorities to supply stock and it is admitted by the learned counsel for the petitioner that since then there was supply of goods to the Fair Price shop of the petitioner. 8. In view of the above, the writ petition is disposed of, directing the authorities to continue to supply the essential commodities to the Fair Price shop of the petitioner. In case the respondent authorities intend to take action against the irregularities, if any, committed by the petitioner, they can take steps in accordance with law. There shall be no order as to costs. 5 As a sequel, miscellaneous applications, pending if any, shall stand closed. _____________________________ JUSTICE RAVI CHEEMALAPATI Date: 31st January, 2026 RKS