APHC010626272022 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH THURSDAY,THE TWENTY NINETH DAY OF JANUARY TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY SIX THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE RAVI CHEEMALAPATI WRIT PETITION NO: Between: 1. TANDRANKI GOPALA RAO, S/O. PAIDAMMA, AGED ABOUT 46 YEARS, R/O.KOTHAPETA VILLAGE, NARASANNAPETA MANDAL, SRIKAKULAM DISTRICT. 1. STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH, REP. BY ITS SECRETARY, CONSUMER AFFAIRS AND CIVIL SECRETARIAT BUILDINGS, VELAGAPUDI, AMARAVATHI,GUNTUR DISTRICT. 2. THE COMMISSIONER, CIVIL SUPPLIES CORPORATION LTD., 4TH AND 5TH FLOOR, H.NO.10 NAGAR, BESIDE SKIS COMPANY, KANURU, BANDAR ROAD, VIJAYAWADA, KRISHNA DISTRICT. 3. THE DISTRICT COLLECTOR, SRIKAKULAM DISTRICT. 4. THE REVENUE DIVISIONAL OFFICER, SRIKAKULAM DISTRICT. 5. THE THASILADAR, NARASANNAPETA MANDAL, SRIKAKULAM DISTRICT. 1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) THURSDAY,THE TWENTY NINETH DAY OF JANUARY TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY SIX PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE RAVI CHEEMALAPATI WRIT PETITION NO: 37412/2022 TANDRANKI GOPALA RAO, S/O. PAIDAMMA, AGED ABOUT 46 YEARS, R/O.KOTHAPETA VILLAGE, NARASANNAPETA MANDAL, SRIKAKULAM DISTRICT. ...PETITIONER AND STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH, REP. BY ITS SECRETARY, CONSUMER AFFAIRS AND CIVIL SUPPLIES DEPARTMENT, SECRETARIAT BUILDINGS, VELAGAPUDI, AMARAVATHI,GUNTUR THE COMMISSIONER, CIVIL SUPPLIES CORPORATION LTD., 4TH AND 5TH FLOOR, H.NO.10-152/1, SRI SAI TOWERS, ASHOK NAGAR, BESIDE SKIS COMPANY, KANURU, BANDAR ROAD, DA, KRISHNA DISTRICT. THE DISTRICT COLLECTOR, SRIKAKULAM DISTRICT. THE REVENUE DIVISIONAL OFFICER, SRIKAKULAM DISTRICT. THE THASILADAR, NARASANNAPETA MANDAL, SRIKAKULAM ...RESPONDENT(S): RC,J W.P.No.37412 of 2022 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH [3332] THURSDAY,THE TWENTY NINETH DAY OF JANUARY THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE RAVI CHEEMALAPATI TANDRANKI GOPALA RAO, S/O. PAIDAMMA, AGED ABOUT 46 YEARS, R/O.KOTHAPETA VILLAGE, NARASANNAPETA MANDAL, ...PETITIONER STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH, REP. BY ITS SECRETARY, SUPPLIES DEPARTMENT, SECRETARIAT BUILDINGS, VELAGAPUDI, AMARAVATHI,GUNTUR THE COMMISSIONER, CIVIL SUPPLIES CORPORATION LTD., 4TH 152/1, SRI SAI TOWERS, ASHOK NAGAR, BESIDE SKIS COMPANY, KANURU, BANDAR ROAD, THE DISTRICT COLLECTOR, SRIKAKULAM DISTRICT. THE REVENUE DIVISIONAL OFFICER, SRIKAKULAM DISTRICT. THE THASILADAR, NARASANNAPETA MANDAL, SRIKAKULAM ...RESPONDENT(S): RC,J W.P.No.37412 of 2022 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 toPleased to issue a writ of mandamus or any other appropriate writ or direction declaring the action of the 3rd respondent in passing Orders in D.Dis.SR(A).No.24/2015/S2, dt.21.01.2018 by confirming the Orders of the 4th respondent in Rc.No.325/2015CS, dt.14.05.2015 as illegal, arbitrary and violation of principles of Natural justice and consequently direct the respondents to continue the petitioner as the Fair Price Shop dealer 283 Kothapeta village, Narasannapeta Mandal, Srikakulam District by setting aside the Orders passed by the 3rd respondent in D.Dis.SR(A).No.24/2015/S2, dt.21.01.2018 in confirming the Orders of the 4th respondent in Rc.No.325/2015CS, dt.14.05.2015 and pass IA NO: 1 OF 2022 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 direct the respondents to continue the petitioner as the Fair Price Shop dealer 283 Kothapeta village, Narasannapeta Mandal, Srikalculam District by suspending the Orders passed by the 3rd respondent in D.Dis. SR(A) .No.24 /2015/ S2, dt.21.01.2018 in confirming the Orders of the 4th respondent in Rc.No.325/2015CS, dt.14.05.2015 pending disposal of the writ petition 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 to permit/ receive counter copies on record by granting leave to the Respondent in the above writ petition and pass Counsel for the Petitioner: 1. RAJU GUBBALA Counsel for the Respondent(S): 1. GP FOR CIVIL SUPPLIES RC,J W.P.No.37412 of 2022 3 ORDER This writ petition has been filed questioning the orders passed by Collector (Civil Supplies) vide D.Dis.SR(A).No.24/2015/S2 dated 21.01.2018, confirming the orders passed by respondent no.4-Revenue Divisional Officer vide Rc.No.3235/2015/CS, dated 14.05.2015 whereby and whereunder the FP shop authorization of the petitioner was cancelled. 2. The contents of the writ affidavit, in brief, are that the petitioner was appointed as Fair Price Shop Dealer and alleging certain violations and variation between ground stock and records, the respondent no.4 issued show cause notice dated 17.04.2015, for which the petitioner submitted explanation and thereupon respondent no.4,without considering the explanation, passed order dated 14.05.2015 cancelling the F.P.Shop authorization. Aggrieved by the said orders, the petitioner preferred an appeal before respondent no.3, who, without considering the facts and circumstances of the case, in a mechanical manner dismissed the appeal. Hence, the writ petition. 2. Heard Sri Raju Gubbala, learned counsel for the petitioner, and Sri Vineeth Appasani, learned Assistant Government Pleader for Civil Supplies. 3. Sri Raju Gubbala, learned counsel for the petitioner, while reiterating the contents of the writ affidavit would contend that there is flagrant violation of principles of natural justice and no reasons muchless justifiable reasons RC,J W.P.No.37412 of 2022 4 were given by both the preliminary as well as appellate authority for cancelling the F.P.shop authorization. He would further contend that the authorities have not at all taken into consideration the explanation submitted by the petitioner as well as the material placed on record and therefore, the impugned order passed by respondent no.3 confirming the orders passed by respondent no.4 are liable to be set aside. Accordingly, prayed to allow the writ petition. 4. On the other hand, Sri Vineeth Appasani, learned Assistant Government Pleader, would contend that there is no violation of principles of natural justice as alleged by the petitioner and both the authorities upon considering the material available on record and after affording sufficient and ample opportunity to the petitioner passed the orders. He would further contend that a revision is provided as against the orders passed by the appellate authority to the District Collector and further Revision to the State Government. However, the petitioner without availing the alternate remedy, bypassing the said remedy without any reasonable cause, preferred this writ petition and therefore, the writ petition is not maintainable. The writ petition lacks merit and the same deserves dismissal. Accordingly, prayed to dismiss the writ petition. RC,J W.P.No.37412 of 2022 5 5. Perused the material available on record and considered the submissions made by learned counsel for the parties. 6. The material available on record would indicate that a show cause notice has been issued to the petitioner inviting explanation and after receiving the said explanation, having found that the explanation is not convincing, the FP shop authorization of the petitioner was cancelled by the preliminary authority. So also the appellate authority, upon considering the submissions made by learned counsel appeared for petitioner, dismissed the appeal confirming the orders passed by the preliminary authority. Therefore, there is no violation of principles of natural justice as contended by the learned counsel for the petitioner. 7. As rightly contended by the learned Assistant Government Pleader, a revision is provided as against the orders passed by the appellate authority to the District Collector and further revision to the State Government. The petitioner did not avail the said remedy, instead filed this writ petition. 8. It is fairly settled that the appeal or revision provided under the statute tantamount to an efficacious and effective alternate remedy. Bypassing the said remedy without any justifiable cause such as violation of principles of natural justice or without jurisdiction is unsustainable. In the case on hand, as already stated, there is no violation of principles of natural RC,J W.P.No.37412 of 2022 6 justice. Hence, invoking writ jurisdiction without sufficient reason for bypassing the alternate remedy is unsustainable. 9. Further, as rightly contended by the learned Assistant Government Pleader, the writ petition is filed in the year 2022 questioning the impugned orders passed in the year 2018 i.e. to say after lapse of four (04) years. It is fairly settled that the person guilty of delay and laches is not entitled to seek equity. Further, we cannot lose site of the fact that in the meanwhile much water had flown and alternative arrangements would also have been made. Therefore, the relief sought by the petitioner cannot be granted. 10. In view of the above, the writ petition is dismissed. The petitioner is at liberty to apply for authorization, whenever any fresh notification is issued. There shall be no order as to costs. Pending miscellaneous petitions, if any, shall stand closed. ___________________________ JUSTICE RAVI CHEEMALAPATI DATE: 29th day of January, 2026. RR