Back
VENKATESWARLU NIMMAGADDA
B M Kondamma – Appellant
Versus
State of AP – Respondent
ORDER :
Venkateswarlu Nimmagadda, J.
The present Writ Petition is filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, seeking the following relief:
2. The case of the petitioner is that he was appointed as fair price shop dealer in respect of Fair Price Shop No.1112015, Rachayapeta Village, Gopavaram Mandal, Y.S.R. Kadapa District in the year 1993. The authorization of the petitioner has been renewed from time to time and it is still subsisting. The petitioner is continuting as fair price shop dealer for the above said shop and distributing essential commodities to the card holders in the village without any remarks and complaints. Whi
None of the cases in the provided list explicitly indicate that they have been overruled, reversed, or treated as bad law. There are no keywords or phrases such as "overruled," "reversed," "overruled by," or "bad law" that suggest any of these cases have been explicitly invalidated or discredited in subsequent rulings.
[Followed]
None of the cases explicitly state that they have been followed by subsequent rulings. The list does not contain language indicating a direct judicial endorsement or reliance on these cases.
[Distinguished]
None of the cases mention being distinguished in later judgments. The provided summaries do not include references to these cases being set apart from others due to factual or legal differences.
[Criticized or Questioned]
The cases do not contain language indicating criticism or questioning of their legal principles in subsequent decisions.
[Unchanged / Precedent]
The cases appear to be standalone legal principles or observations without indication of subsequent treatment that affirms or modifies their standing.
Since the list lacks explicit treatment language, the safest categorization is that these cases are neither overruled nor explicitly criticized or distinguished based on the provided summaries.]
All the cases in the list lack explicit treatment indicators. Without access to subsequent case law or detailed judicial history, it is impossible to definitively categorize their current legal standing or treatment. Therefore, these cases are best considered as potentially authoritative but unconfirmed in terms of subsequent judicial treatment based solely on the provided summaries.
**Source :** Jawahar Lal Singh VS Naresh Singh - Supreme Court Hindustan Times VS Union Of India - Supreme Court B. Manjula VS District Collector, Civil Supplies - Andhra Pradesh Assistant Commissioner, Commercial Tax Department, Works Contract & Leasing, Kota VS Shukla & Brothers - Supreme Court Siemens Engineering And Manufacturing Company Of India LTD. VS Union Of India - Supreme Court Gurdial Singh Fijji VS State Of Punjab - Supreme Court
Suspension of fair price shop authorization requires adherence to principles of natural justice, including proper enquiry and reasoned decisions.
The cancellation of a Fair Price Shop dealer's authorization must follow due process, including a fair inquiry and provision of reasons, as mandated by the Control Order, 2018.
The court established that fair price shop dealers must be afforded a proper inquiry and opportunity to defend against charges before cancellation of their authorization.
The court established that fair price shop dealers must be afforded a proper inquiry and opportunity to be heard before any cancellation of authorization can occur.
Public distribution system – Cancellation of licence - Cancellation of Absence of reasoning as to the mandatory requirement of provision which conferred jurisdiction on the quasi judicial authority o....
Absence of reasoning as to the mandatory requirement of provision which conferred jurisdiction on the quasi judicial authority or a Court or administrative authority is mandatory. In the absence of r....
The cancellation of a fair price shop dealer's authorization must adhere to natural justice and inquiry procedures, ensuring a fair hearing and proper assessment of justifications.
The disciplinary authority must conduct a fair enquiry and consider the dealer's explanation before suspending authorization, in compliance with the relevant provisions of the Control Order, 2018.
Distribution of commodities - no enquiry, more particularly, no opportunity was afforded to enable the petitioner to explain the reason for the alleged variation if any found and seized the essential....
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
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
