Research › Search › Judgment

High Court of Andhra Pradesh · body

2026 DAILYLAW 24477 (AP)

BYLLA RAJKUMAR v. State of Andhra Pradesh

WP/25751/2024 · 2026-01-27

Ravi Cheemalapati

body2026

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

APHC010502952024 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) [3332] WEDNESDAY,THE TWENTY EIGHTH DAY OF JANUARY TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY SIX PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE RAVI CHEEMALAPATI WRIT PETITION NO: 25751/2024 Between: 1. BYLLA RAJKUMAR, S/O DEVADASU AGE.36 YEARS, OCC. FP SHOP DEALER OF SHOP NO.0835026, YADAVALLI VILLAGE RACHERLA MANDAL, PRAKASAM DIST. ...PETITIONER AND 1. STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH, REP.BY ITS PRINCIPLE SECRETARY CIVIL SUPPLIES DEPARTMENT, SECRETARIAT, VELAGAPUDI, GUNTUR DIST 2. THE DISTRICT SUPPLY OFFICER, . ONGOLE TOWN, PRAKASAM DIST. 3. THE SUBCOLLECTOR, MARKAPUR DIVISION, PRAKASAM DIST. 4. THE TAHSILDAR, RACHERLA MANDAL, PRAKASAM DIST. ...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 Writ Order or Orders or a Direction more particularly one in the nature of Writ of Mandamus declaring the impugned order issued by the 3rd respondent vide Rc.C/858/2024 dt.5- 11-2024 suspending the petitioner's authorization in respect of the FP 2 Shop No.0835026, Yadavalii Village Racherla Mandal, Prakasam Dist., is illegal, arbitrary malafide and contrary to provisions of Andhra Pradesh State Targetted Public Distribution System (Control) Order, 2018 apart from violation of the principles of natural justice and consequentially set aside the impugned order dt.5-11-2024 by directing Respondents to continue petitioner as FP Shop dealer as usual, 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 impugned order passed by the 3rd respondent vide Rc.C/858/2024 dt:5-11- 2024 in respect of FP Shop No.0835026, Yadavalli Village Racherla Mandal, Prakasam Dist., by continuing the petitioner as dealer as usual, pending disposal of the writ petition. Counsel for the Petitioner: 1. M M M SRINIVASA RAO Counsel for the Respondent(S): 1. GP FOR CIVIL SUPPLIES The Court made the following: 3 ORDER: Questioning the proceedings dated 05.11.2024 issued by the 3rd respondent vide Rc.C/858/2024 suspending the petitioner’s authorization in respect of Fair Price Shop No.0835026, Yadavalli Village, Racherla Mandal, Prakasam District, the present writ petition is filed. 2. Heard Sri M.M.M.Srinivasa Rao, learned counsel for the petitioner and Sri Appasani Vineeth, learned Assistant Government Pleader for Civil Supplies. 3. Learned counsel for the petitioner while reiterating the contents of the writ affidavit would contend that the authorities, alleging variations in the PDS rice and sugar packets found during inspection of the Fair Price shop, issued show cause notice, for which the petitioner submitted explanation, however, the authorities, without considering the explanation, in a mechanical way, suspended the authorization of the petitioner without giving reasons in violation of the orders passed by this Court in K.Prabhavathi vs. State of A.P. 1, therefore, the impugned suspension order is liable to be set aside. Accordingly, prayed to allow the writ petition. 4. Sri Appasani Vineeth, learned Assistant Government Pleader, justified the impugned order of suspension contending that as the authorities found variation in between fortified rice and sugar packets, 1 2020(6) ALD 209 4 suspended the 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 Fair Price shop dealership authorization was suspended pending enquiry. This Court vide orders dated 11.11.2024, suspended the impugned orders directing the respondents to continue the petitioner as Fair Price Shop Dealer. 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 (03) 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, this Court is inclined to dispose of the writ petition by passing the following order: 5 <The authorities shall conclude the enquiry at an earliest. Till conclusion of enquiry, the interim orders passed by this Court on 11.11.2024 shall continue; however, the same shall be subject to the outcome of the final enquiry.= 10. Accordingly, the Writ Petition is disposed of. There shall be no order as to costs. As a sequel, miscellaneous applications, pending if any, shall stand closed. _____________________________ JUSTICE RAVI CHEEMALAPATI Date: 28th January, 2026 JLV 6 277 THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE RAVI CHEEMALAPATI WRIT PETITION NO: 25751/2024 Date: 28th January, 2026 JLV