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

2025 Supreme(Online)(AP) 21029

HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH
V.SUJATHA
Smt. Karakavalsa Laxmi – Appellant
Versus
The State of Andhra Pradesh – Respondent
WP 33815/2025



APHC010655992025 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH [3333]

AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction)

THURSDAY,THE FOURTH DAY OF DECEMBER TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SMT JUSTICE V.SUJATHA WRIT PETITION NO: 33815/2025 Between:

1. S MT. KARAKAVALSA LAXMI,, W/O LATE BRUNDAVANAM, FPS DEALER, F.P. SHOP NO. 0115040, RESIDENT OF SOBHANAPURAM VILLAGE, KOTTURU MANDAL, SRIKAKULAM DISTRICT ...PETITIONER AND

1. T HE STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH, REP., BY ITS PRINCIPAL SECRETARY CIVIL SUPPLIES DEPARTMENT, SECRETARIAT BUILDINGS, VELAGAPUDI, GUNTUR DISTRICT.

2. T HE DISTRICT COLLECTOR, SRIKAKULAM DISTRICT

3. T HE REVENUE DIVISIONAL OFFICER /

SUBCOLLECTOR, TEKKALI DIVISION, SRIKAKULAM DISTRICT.

4. T HE TAHSILDAR, KOTTURU MANDAL, SRIKAKULAM 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 topleased to issue an appropriate Writ, Order or Direction, more particularly one in the nature of a Writ of Mandamus declaring the impugned Proceedings Rc. NO.1273/2025/F dated 07.11.2025 issued by the Respondent no.3 terminating the petitioner's authorization as Fair Price Shop Dealer of F.P. Shop No. 0115040, Shobhanapuram Village, Kotturu Mandal, Srikakulam District, as arbitrary, illegal, violative of the principles of natural justice contrary to the provisions and scheme of the Andhra Pradesh State Targeted Public Distribution System (Control) Order, 2018 and consequently set aside the impugned termination order dated 07.11.2025 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 suspend the impugned Proceedings Rc. No.1273/2025/F dated 07.11.2025 issued Respondent no.3, terminating the petitioner‟s authorization as Fair Price Shop Dealer pending disposal of the above Writ Petition Counsel for the Petitioner:

1. D S SIVADARSHAN Counsel for the Respondent(S):

1. GP FOR REVENUE

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

ORDER:-

This writ petition is 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 a Writ of Mandamus declaring the impugned Proceedings Rc. NO.1273/2025/F dated 07.11.2025 issued by the Respondent no.3 terminating the petitioner's authorization as Fair Price Shop Dealer of F.P. Shop No. 0115040, Shobhanapuram Village, Kotturu Mandal, Srikakulam District, as arbitrary, illegal, violative of the principles of natural justice contrary to the provisions and scheme of the Andhra Pradesh State Targeted Public Distribution System (Control) Order, 2018 and consequently set aside the impugned termination order dated 07.11.2025.,...”

2. The petitioner being a member of Kranthi Self Help Group was appointed as a Fair Price Shop Dealer for Shop No. 0115040 of Shobhanapuram Village, Kotturu Mandal, Srikakulam District in the year 2017 on temporary basis. The petitioner‟s authorization was extended from time to time. Since the date of his appointment, the petitioner has been distributing essential commodities to the cardholders without any complaints from any quarter.

3. While so, on 16.10.2025, the inspecting authorities inspected the petitioner‟s fair price shop and verified the stock position. During the said inspection, it was allegedly observed that there was a variation of (+46 kgs in Sortex Rice) out of a total stock of 4125 kgs. Basing on the report submitted by the 4th respondent, the 3rd respondent issued a show cause notice on 18.10.2025 calling for an explanation from the petitioner within a period of three days, for which the petitioner submitted his explanation on 23.10.2025.

4. The grievance of the petitioner in the present writ petition is that, though the variation is within the permissible limits as per the clause 29(a) of Andhra Prade

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
whatsapp-icon Back to top