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) 19008

HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH
V.SUJATHA
SRI N V R PRASAD – Appellant
Versus
THE STATE OF AP – Respondent
WP 23058/2023



APHC010446082023 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI [3333]

(Special Original Jurisdiction)

MONDAY, THE FIFTEENTH DAY OF DECEMBER TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SMT JUSTICE V.SUJATHA WRIT PETITION NO: 23058/2023 Between:

1. S RI N V R PRASAD, S/O RADHAKRISHNA MURTHY, AGED ABOUT

53 YEARS, IBRAHIMPATNAM VIJAYAWADA KRISHNA DISTRICT.

...PETITIONER AND

1. T HE STATE OF AP, REP. BY ITS SECRETARY, CONSUMER AFFAIRS AND CIVIL SUPPLIES DEPARTMENT, SECRETARIAT BUILDINGS, VELAGAPUDI, AMARAVATHI, GUNTUR DISTRICT.

2. T HE COLLECTOR CS, VIJAYAWADA, NTR DISTRICT 3. T HE SUBCOLLECTOR, VIJAYAWADA, NTR DISTRICT

4. T HE TAHSILDAR, IBRAHIMPATNAM, VIJAYAWADA NTR DISTRICT.

5. D EPUTY TAHSILDAR PDS, IBRAHIMPATNAM VIJAYAWADA NTR DISTRICT.

...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 to For the reasons stated above, it is therefore prayed that this Honourable Court may be pleased to issue a writ order or direction, more particularly one in the nature of writ of Mandamus, declaring the action of the 3rd Respondent in cancelling the authorisation of petitioner and imposing penalty of Rs. 20 Lakhs rupees by his proceeding RC. C/188/2022 dt. 16-08- 2023 without conducting any enquiry is illegal, arbitrary and violation of principals of natural justice and consequently set aside the same and to pass such other order or orders as this Honourable Court may deem fit and proper in the circumstances of the case and to pass IA NO: 1 OF 2023 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 to suspend RC. C/188/2022 dt. 16-08-2023 issued by the 3rd respondent by continuing the petitioner as FP Shop Dealer of Shop No. 0608003 of Ibrahimpatnam Village, Krishna District, pending disposal of the writ petition, and pass such other order or orders may deem fit and proper in the circumstances of the case. pending disposal of the above writ petition and to 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 to receive the counter copies on record by allowing the leave petition in the above writ petition and pass Counsel for the Petitioner:

1. K SRINIVAS Counsel for the Respondent(S):

1. GP FOR CIVIL SUPPLIES The Court made the following:

ORDER:

The present writ petition came to be filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India seeking 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 3rd Respondent in cancelling the authorization of petitioner and imposing penalty of Rs.20 Lakhs by his proceeding RC. C/188/2022 dt. 16-08-2023 without conducting any enquiry is illegal, arbitrary and violation of principals of natural justice and consequently set aside the same ….”

2. Brief facts of the case are as follows:

a) The petitioner was appointed as a permanent Fair Price Shop dealer for Shop No.0608003 of Ibrahimpatnam Village, Krishna District. The petitioner‟s authorization has been renewed from time to time.

b) While the matter stood thus, on 09.02.2022, the staff of the Deputy Tahsildar, Ibrahimpatnam, Revenue Inspector, VRO, Revenue Inspector of Ibrahimpatnam has inspected the petitioner‟s Fair Price Shop and found certain variations and irregularities and seized the entire quantity of essential commodities available in the petitioner‟s Fair Price Shop. Basing on a report submitted by the 4th respondent, the 3rd respondent issued a show-cause notice dated 24.02.2022 framing a single charge against the petitioner alleging that the petitioner has violated Clause 10(f) and 22(1) of APTPDS Control Order, 2018. For which, the petitioner submitted his explanation on

10.03.2022 stating that the seized quantity of

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