APHC010366012026 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI WRIT PETITION NO: 19664 of 2026 Bench Sr.No:-129 [3506] M/ S Keerthy Medical Stores Private Limited, ...Petitioner Vs. Tirumala Tirupati Devasthanamsttd and Others ...Respondent(s) ********** CORAM : SRI JUSTICE CHALLA GUNARANJAN DATE : 22th July 2026 Present: Advocate for Petitioner: SASANKA BHUVANAGIRI Advocate for Respondent: V.DYUMANI (SC for TTD) ORDER: Present Writ Petition is filed under Article 226 of Constitution of India seeking following relief: “to issue a writ or direction more particularly one in the nature of Writ of Mandamus declaring the action of the 1st respondent in including the petitioner in the Block List black listing and debarring it from participation in TTD E- Tenders for three years vide impugned Proceedings dated 09072026 bearing Roc No Rev4/TTD4702237/5/2024/ RevSecTTD as illegal arbitrary unconstitutional and violative of principles of natural justice and consequently set aside the Proceedings dated 09072026 bearing Roc No Rev4/TTD47022 37/5 2024/RevSecTTD while directing the respondents to permit the petitioner to participate in all future e-tenders and business opportunities with the respondents by making it clear that such orders could not have been passed without hearing the petitioner and pass such other or orders as this Hon’ble Court deems fit and proper in the circumstances of the case”. 2. Heard Sri K.S. Murthy, learned Senior Counsel assisted by Sri Sasanka Bhuvangiri, learned counsel for the 2 CGR, J W.P.No.19664 of 2026 petitioner and Smt. V. Dyumani, learned Standing Counsel appearing for the 1st respondent-TTD. 3. Petitioner is stated to be engaged in business of retail and wholesale pharmaceuticals, medical devices and allied healthcare products. He possesses valid drug licences as contemplated under the provisions of the Drugs and Cosmetics Act, 1940 and Rules made thereunder. In pursuance of the e-tender floated by the respondents, petitioner was leased out a medical shop situated at the entrance of new block, BIRRD Hospital, Tirupati, for sale of branded medicines and accordingly, lease agreement came to be executed on 17.02.2025 and the said lease was for a period of one year. However, on 23.08.2025, a team of officials had visited the medical shop run by the petitioner and it was found that there were certain gaps or irregularities. Based on the quality audit check report, petitioner was issued a show-cause notice, dated 22.09.2025, pointing out the lapses and was called upon to submit the explanation for the proposed action of cancellation of licence. Petitioner submitted an explanation on 25.09.2025, refuting the allegations of lapses. By impugned proceedings, dated 09.07.2026, passed by the 1st respondent, the application of petitioner for renewal of licence for the second year has been rejected and further, it has been 3 CGR, J W.P.No.19664 of 2026 blacklisted for a period of three years and thereby debarred from participating in future tenders to be floated by the respondents, assailing the same, the present Writ Petition is filed. 4. Sri K.S. Murthy, learned Senior Counsel assisted by Sri Sasanka Bhuvangiri, learned counsel for the petitioner would contend that the show-cause notice dose not set out the specific lapses and the lapses mentioned are very vague and generic. Further, the said show-cause notice had been issued without furnishing a copy of the quality audit check report and further the petitioner was merely asked to submit explanation, proposed in regard to the action of cancellation of licence, but whereas the impugned order had gone beyond the same and petitioner had been blacklisted from participating in future tenders, which was not the purpose for which the show-case notice issued. Therefore, the impaction is clearly arbitrary, illegal and in violation of principles of natural justice. 5. Smt. V. Dyumani, learned Standing Counsel appearing for the 1st respondent-TTD, has passed on a copy of the quality audit check report across the bench to substantiate that the allegations were serious in nature. Therefore, after offering opportunity to petitioner by issuing a show-cause notice, 4 CGR, J W.P.No.19664 of 2026 the impugned order came to be passed and therefore tried to justify the same. 6. The show-cause notice alleges the following lapses:- a) All are generic drugs. b) Majority of the durgs and medical devices are substandard. c) Pharmacists dispensed alternate brands instead of the prescribed medicines. d) Few Ayurvedic preparations were found. e) Non-medical items were stored inside the dedicated drug storage refrigerator causing cross-contamination issues. f) Injection Enoxaparin Sodium was not stored as per the manufacturer’s recommendations. 7. Firstly, the lapses thus pointed out emanate from the quality audit check report, which admittedly has not been furnished to the petitioner, which is in violation of principles of natural justice. Secondly, the lapses pointed out above are very vague and they do not really point out what exactly were the shortcomings for the petitioner to submit the explanation. As petitioner was not proceeded with the copy of quality audit check report, the lapses pointed out in the show-cause notice cannot be apprehended for offering any sort of explanation. The show-cause notice merely proposed the action of cancellation of licence and did not mention anything about the petitioner being blacklisted. 5 CGR, J W.P.No.19664 of 2026 8. Therefore, clearly, the impugned order has traverse beyond the scope of show-cause notice and in a way, petitioner was not given any fair opportunity to contest by filing objections in regard to the blacklisting. Therefore, on all these grounds, the show-cause notice as well as the consequential order are unsustainable. It is also to be noted that the agreement period has already elapsed by efflux of time. 9. In view of the same, no purpose would serve in keeping the matter pending, therefore with the consent of both the learned counsels appearing on either side, the Writ Petition is disposed of, at the admission stage, by setting aside the show- cause notice in Roc.No.Rev4/TTD-47022(32)/33/2025-RevSec- TTD, dated 22.09.2025, passed by the 1st respondent as well as the consequential order in Roc.No.Rev4/TTD- 47022(37)/5/2024/RevSec-TTD, dated 09.07.2026, passed by the 1st respondent. However, the respondents are at liberty to issue fresh show-cause notice and proceed further in accordance with law. There shall be no order as to costs. As a sequel, all pending applications shall stand closed. _____________________________ JUSTICE CHALLA GUNARANJAN Date: 22.07.2026 BSM 6 CGR, J W.P.No.19664 of 2026 THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE CHALLA GUNARANJAN WRIT PETITION No: 19664 of 2026 Date: 22.07.2026 BSM