SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img

2021 Supreme(AP) 918

IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI
M. GANGA RAO, J.
B. Parvathi - Appellant
Versus
State of Andhra Pradesh & Others - Respondents
Writ Petition No. 8941 of 2021
Decided On : 23-08-2021

Advocates Appeared:
For the Appellant : P. Narahari Babu.
For the Respondents: GP.

Headnote:

Constitution of India, 1950 - Article 14, 19(1)(g) , 226 - Andhra Pradesh State Targeted Public Distribution System (Control) Order, 2018 - Section 8(4) – Equality before Law - Writ of Mandamus – Power of High court to issue writs - Held, Court found that respondent authorities having complied order passed by this Court in W.P. and once again issued suspension-cum-show cause notice which is contrary to law - Respondent authorities would have passed a separate order as per provisions of Section 8(4) of A.P.S.T.P.D.S. (Control) Order and as per law laid down by this Court, respondents are under an obligation to complete final enquiry within a period of ninety (90) days - Continuation of petitioner's fair price shop authorization under suspension for an unspecified period is illegal - Writ Petition stand closed.

ORDER :

M. Ganga Rao, J.

1. This Writ Petition is filed under Article 226 of Constitution of India for the following relief/s:-

    "... to issue a Writ, Order or direction more particularly one in the nature of Writ of Mandamus declaring the order of the 3rd respondent in his proceedings Rc. No. 2924/2020/C dated 20.03.2021 by suspending the authorization of the petitioner as fair price shop dealer of shop No. 1253014 at Thurakalapatnam Village, Roddam Mandal, Anantapur District is illegal, arbitrary and violative of principles of natural justice and violative of Articles 14, 19(1)(g) of the Constitution of India and also violative of Andhra Pradesh State Targeted Public Distribution System (Control) Order, 2018 and consequently set-aside the order of suspension of authorization of the petitioner and further consequently direct the respondents to continue the petitioner to hold Fair Price shop No. 1253014 At Thurakalapatnam Village, Roddam Mandal, Anantapur District and pass such other order or orders ..."

2. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned Assistant Government Pleader for Civil Supplies.

3. The case of the petitioner is that she was appointed as a temporary fair price shop dealer of shop No. 1253014 at Thurakalapatnam Village, Roddam Mandal, Anantapur District. Since then, she has been distributing the essential commodities to the card holders without any complaint. While things stood thus, basing on the report of the 4th respondent, the 3rd respondent issued a suspension cum show cause notice vide proceedings dated 19.12.2020 suspending the authorization of the petitioner's fair price shop. Challenging the said proceedings the petitioner filed W.P. No. 659 of 2021. This Court vide order dated 18.01.2021 allowed the Writ Petition setting aside the impugned suspension-cum-show cause notice dated 19.12.2020. The said order was implemented. Again on 20.03.2021 another suspension-cum-show cause notice was issued alleging that certain irregularities were committed by the petitioner as a fair price shop dealer and also 6-A case was booked under the Essential Commodities Act, 1955. The suspension was challenged in this Writ Petition. This Court vide order dated 27.04.2021 suspended the "suspension cum show cause notice", to the extent of order of suspension of authorization of this petitioner exercising the power under Clause 8(4) of Andhra Pradesh State Targeted Public Distribution System (Control) Order, 2018 while allowing the 3rd respondent to proceed to take action against this petitioner as an interim measure in accordance with law on the basis of the show cause notice and the petitioner is permitted to submit her explanation treating the impugned proceedings as show cause notice. Accordingly, the petitioner submitted her explanation and she has been continuing as a fair price shop dealer.

4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the variations in the stock are within the permissible limits and a 6-A case under the E.C. Act is pending before the Collector (Civil Supplies).

5. The respondents filed counter affidavit and vacate petition denying the allegations made by the petitioner and for vacating the interim order dated 27.04.2021.

6. Learned Assistant Government Pleader for Civil Supplies states that the petitioner has committed certain irregularities in distribution of the essential commodities to the card holders. Hence, the impugned suspension-cum-show cause notice is issued pending enquiry. However in pursuance of the order dated 27.04.2021 the petitioner is allowed to continue her fair price shop dealership and considering the explanation submitted by the petitioner, the final orders will be passed as per law.

7. Having regard to the facts and circumstances of the case and considering the submissions of learned counsel and perused the record, this Court found that the respondent authorities having complied the order passed by this Court in W.P. No. 659 of 2021 dated 18.01.2021 and once again issued th

Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon Back to top