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

2025 Supreme(Online)(AP) 17744

HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH
V.SUJATHA
M VENKATESWARA REDDY – Appellant
Versus
THE STATE OF AP – Respondent
WP 35338/2025



##PAGE1##

APHC010684852025 2025:APHC:59059

IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH

AT AMARAVATI [3333]

(Special Original Jurisdiction)

MONDAY,THE TWENTY SECOND DAY OF DECEMBER

TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE

PRESENT

THE HONOURABLE SMT JUSTICE V.SUJATHA

WRIT PETITION NO: 35338/2025

Between:

1. M VENKATESWARA REDDY, S/O, M. NALLA REDDY, AGED ABOUT

54 YEARS, OCC FAIR PRICE SHOP DEALER, R/O. H.NO. 3-125,

PYALAKURTHY VILLAGE, KODUMUR MANDAL, KURNOOL

DISTRICT

...PETITIONER

AND

1. T HE STATE OF AP, REP. BY ITS PRINCIPAL SECRETARY,

CONSUMER AFFAIRS, FOOD AND CIVIL SUPPLIES,

SECRETARIAT, VELAGAPUDI, GUNTUR DISTRICT-522237

2. T HE COLLECTOR CS, KURNOOL DISTRICT, KURNOOL-518002

3. T HE REVENUE DIVISIONAL OFFICER, KURNOOL, KURNOOL

DISTRICT-518002

4. T HE TAHSILDHAR, KODUMUR MANDAL, KURNOOL DISTRICT-

518464

...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

particularly one in the nature of Writ of Mandamus, declaring the impugned

orders of the 3rd respondent vide Rc.DT(LR) 809/2025, dated 28.11.2025, in

suspending the authorization of the petitioner fair price shop dealer to Shop

No. 1319037 of Pyalakurthy Village, Kodumur Mandal, Kurnool District, as

##PAGE2##

2

2025V:SA,JP HC:59059

W.P.No.35338 of 2025

illegal, arbitrary and in flagrant disregard to law and consequently set aside

the aforesaid impugned orders of the 3rd respondent 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 continue the petitioner as fair price shop

dealer to Shop No. 1319037 of Pyalakurthy Village, Kodumur Mandal,

Kurnool District by suspending the impugned orders of the 3rd respondent in

Rc.DT(LR) 809/2025, dated 28.11.2025, pending disposal of the above writ

petition and pass

Counsel for the Petitioner:

1. K NAGA PHANINDRA

Counsel for the Respondent(S):

1. GP FOR CIVIL SUPPLIES

The Court made the following:

##PAGE3##

3

2025V:SA,JP HC:59059

W.P.No.35338 of 2025

ORDER:

The present Writ Petition came to be filed under Article 226 of the

Constitution of India seeking the following relief:-

“….to issue an appropriate writ, order or direction more particularly one in

the nature of Writ of Mandamus, declaring the impugned orders of the 3rd

respondent vide Rc.DT(LR) 809/2025, dated 28.11.2025, in suspending

the authorization of the petitioner fair price shop dealer to Shop No.

1319037 of Pyalakurthy Village, Kodumur Mandal, Kurnool District, as

illegal, arbitrary and in flagrant disregard to law and consequently set

aside the aforesaid impugned orders of the 3rd respondent and pass….”

2. The petitioner herein was appointed as a permanent fair price shop

dealer of shop No.1319037 of Pyalakurthy village, Kodumur mandal, Kurnool

district in the year 2010 and ever since, he has been distributing essential

commodities to the cardholders without there being any complaint from

whomsoever concerned and his authorization has been renewed from time to

time.

3. While the matter stood thus, on 04.07.2025, the Mandal Revenue

Inspector and other officials, inspected the petitioner’s fair price shop and

allegedly found variation of (-)140 kilograms of PDS rice; accordingly, a case

under Section 6A of the Essential Commodities Act, 1955 was registered

against the petitioner and the 3rd respondent has issued a show cause notice

on 10.07.2025 to the petitioner seeking his explanation to the single charge

framed against him. Pursuant to the notice dated 10.07.2025, the petitioner

##PAGE4##

4

2025V:SA,JP HC:59059

W.P.No.35338 of 2025

submitted his explanation on 17.07.2025 denying the allegation leveled

against him. However, as the petitioner’s authorization was suspended by the

3rd respondent pending enquiry vide proceedings dated 24.07.2025, without

considering his explanation dated 17.07.2025, the petitioner was const

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