Research › Search › Judgment

High Court of Andhra Pradesh · body

2026 DAILYLAW 26952 (AP)

ORSU EDUKONDALU @ YEDUKONDALU v. THE STATE OF AP

WP/34519/2025 · 2026-02-15

Ravi Cheemalapati

body2026

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

APHC010665552025 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) [3332] MONDAY,THE SIXTEENTH DAY OF FEBRUARY TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY SIX PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE RAVI CHEEMALAPATI WRIT PETITION NO: 34519/2025 Between: 1. ORSU EDUKONDALU @ YEDUKONDALU, S/O. VENKATESWARLU HINDU, AGED ABOUT 37 YEARS, FP SHOP DEALER, SHOP NO. 0809027, PEDDANAGULAVARAM VILLAGE, MARKAPUR MANDAL, PRAKASAM DISTRICT. ...PETITIONER AND 1. THE STATE OF AP, REP. BY ITS PRINCIPAL SECRETARY, CIVIL SUPPLIES, SECRETARIAT AT VELAGAPUDI AMARAVATHI, GUNTUR DIST. 2. THE JOINT COLLECTOR CIVIL SUPPLIES, ONGOLE, PRAKASAM DISTRICT. 3. THE SUB COLLECTOR/RDO FAC, MARKAPUR, PRAKASAM DISTRICT. 4. THE TAHSILDAR, MARKAPUR MANDAL, PRAKASAM DISTRICT. 5. SMT TAMMISETTY LAKSHMI PADMAVATHI, W/O SRINIVASULU, 1ST LEADER OF VIGNESWARA SHG GROUP, AGED ABOUT 45 YEARS, PEDDA NAGULAVARAM VILLAGE, MARKAPUR MANDAL, PRAKASAM DISTRICT, PIN CODE 523 320. R5 IS IMPLEADED AS PER THE COURT'S ORDER DT.22.12.2025 IN I.A.NO.02 OF 2025 2 ...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 an appropriate writ order or direction more one in the nature of Writ of mandamus or any other appropriate writ order or direction declaring the action of the 3rd Respondent vide proceedings in Rc.C/595/2025 dated 02-12-2025 suspending the petitioners authorization in respect of FP Shop No. 0809027 Pedda Nagulavaram Village, Markapur Mandal, Prakasam District without assigning any valid reasons and without following the procedure as contemplated under A.P. State Targeted Public Distribution System (Control) order 2018, besides offending Article 14 and 19 of Constitution of India and consequentially direct the respondents to allot the stocks for distribution to the card holders by suspending the order issued by the 3rd respondent vide proceedings in Rc.C/595/2025 dated 02-12-2025 in respect of F.P. Shop No. 0809027 Pedda Nagulavaram Village, Markapur Mandal, Prakasam District 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 direct the respondents to allot the stocks for distribution to the card holders by suspending the order issued by the 3rd respondent vide proceedings in Rc.C/595/2025 dated 02-12-2025 in respect of F.P. Shop No. 0809027 Pedda Nagulavaram Village, Markapur Mandal, Prakasam District pending disposal of the above writ petition and pass IA NO: 2 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 may be pleased to permit implead the proposed Respondent No. 5 as party Respondent No. 5 in W.P.No.34519 of 2025 and the miscellaneous petitions therein and pass 3 Counsel for the Petitioner: 1. KOPPARTHI SUMATHI Counsel for the Respondent(S): 1. GP FOR CIVIL SUPPLIES 2. SIVA SANKARA RAO BORRA The Court made the following: 4 O R D E R: Questioning the proceedings dated 02.12.2025 issued by the 3rd respondent vide Rc.C/595/2025, suspending the petitioner’s authorization in respect of Fair Price Shop No.0809027, Pedda Nagulavaram Village, Markapur Mandal, the present writ petition is filed. 2. Heard Smt. Kopparthi Sumathi, 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, contended that the authorities, alleging variation in the ground balance of commodities found during inspection of the Fair Price Shop, issued a show-cause notice, to which the petitioner submitted an explanation. However, the authorities, without considering the said explanation, mechanically suspended the authorization of the petitioner without assigning 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, she prayed to allow the writ petition. 4. Sri Appasani Vineeth, learned Assistant Government Pleader, justified the impugned order of suspension, contending that the 1 2020(6) ALD 209 5 authorities found variation in the ground balance of commodities and therefore suspended the Fair Price Shop authorization of the petitioner pending final enquiry, after following the procedure contemplated under law. He further contended that the writ petition, being devoid of merit, deserves to be dismissed. Accordingly, he prayed to dismiss the writ petition. 5. This Court has perused the material available on record and considered the submissions made by the learned counsel for the parties. 6. The petitioner’s Fair Price Shop dealership authorization was suspended pending enquiry. Though the writ petition is of the year 2025, no interim orders have been passed. 7. Clause 8(4)(2) of the Andhra Pradesh Targeted Public Distribution System (Control) Order, 2018 mandates that the appointing authority shall dispose of the disciplinary case filed against Fair Price Shop dealers as early as possible, preferably within a period of three (03) months from the date of filing, keeping in view the convenience of the cardholders and for the smooth functioning of the Targeted Public Distribution System. 8. It is fairly conceded by the learned Assistant Government Pleader that the enquiry has not been completed so far. 6 9. In view of the above circumstances, without going into the merits of the matter, this Court is inclined to dispose of the writ petition by passing the following order: “The authorities are directed to conclude the enquiry within a period of two (02) months from the date of receipt of a copy of this order, failing which the order of suspension shall stand revoked.” 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 16th February, 2026 cbn 7 222 THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE RAVI CHEEMALAPATI WRIT PETITION NO.34519 of 2025 16th February, 2026 cbn