ORDER:

This Writ Petition under Article 226 of Constitution of India is filed for the following relief:

“…to issue a writ, order or direction more particularly one in the nature of Writ of Mandamus declaring the action of the 4^th and the 5^th respondents in not allotting the essential commodities to the fair price shops held by the petitioner at Amarapuramu Village (Shop No. 1261004) of Amarapuramu Mandal, Sri Satya Sai District erstwhile Anantapur District without there being any reason, without issuing any notice to the petitioner though the petitioner authorization is valid and subsisting as illegal, arbitrary 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 principles of natural justice and consequently to direct the respondents to continue the petitioner to hold fair price shop dealership of Amarapuramu Village (Shop No.1261004) of Amarapuramu Mandal, Sri Satya Sai District erstwhile Anantapur District and pass…”

2. The case of the petitioner is briefly as follows:

The petitioner was appointed as the temporary dealer of fair price shop No. 1261004 in Amarapuramu Mandal, Sri Satya Sai District, by the Joint Collector (3^rd respondent) on 03.10.2019 under the self-employment group namely Roja Mahila Sangham SHG. Since then, the petitioner distributed commodities without any complaints. However, on 22.07.2024, the Tahsildar (5^th respondent) instructed the petitioner not to deposit the cheque for the issuance of commodities and stated that commodities would not be issued. Due to local political pressures, respondents No.3 to 5 are attempting to allocate commodities to their preferred parties. Consequently, the petitioner filed W.P. No.16058 of 2024, which this Court disposed of on 26.07.2024, directing the respondents to supply essential commodities to the petitioner. Consequently, the respondents supplied the commodities as ordered. On 03.12.2024, the staff of the 5^threspondent, including CSDT, IOP and DCTO, visited the shop at approximately 04:30 PM for an inspection. They found minor variations in the stock, noting discrepancies such as (+) 30.5 kgs of fortified rice, (+) 18 packets of ICDS 3 kg rice packet, 00 packets of sugar, (+) 18 packets of red gram 1kg packet, 00 of ragi (PDI), (-) 0.6 packet of ragi atta 1 kg packet (PDS), (+) 03 packets of palm oil litre packet, (+) 18 of red gram dal (ICDS), (+) 18 packets of palm oil half litre packet, 00 packet of jaggery 1 kg packet, 00 packet of ragi atta 1kg packet (MDM). They seized the stock and handed it over to CSDT. The respondent authorities forcibly took the petitioner’s signature on the panchanama, despite the petitioner’s objection, claiming that the discrepancies noted were inaccurate. They recorded more variations than what actually existed, influenced by local pressures. Till date, the authorities have not issued any notice or proceeding, yet they continued to withhold commodities from the petitioner, preventing from supplying the commodities to the cardholders. The 5^threspondent is again attempting to distribute commodities through unauthorized third parties. Hence, the present writ petition is filed.

3. The learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that though the alleged variation in the stock is within the permissible limit insofar as the rice is concerned and the other variation in the stock is negligible and need not be considered for passing harsh order of suspending the dealership of petitioner, due to political reasons, the impugned order to file a case under Section 6A of the Essential Commodities Act, 1955, was passed. He further submitted that without suspending or cancelling the authorization of the petitioner, the supply of the essential commodities has been stopped.

4. The learned Assistant Government Pleader placed on record the written instructions of the Tahsildar (FAC), Amarapuramu Mandal vide Rc.No.B/259/2024, dated 09.12.20