Suspension of a Fair Price shop dealership pending enquiry can be legally executed without a show-cause notice; however, such disciplinary proceedings must be concluded within a reasonable timeframe, preferably three months, to prevent indefinite suspension.

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 issue an appropriate Writ, Order or Direction, more particularly one in the nature of a Writ of Mandamus, declaring the action of the respondents in issuing the impugned proceedings in Rc.No.F/514/2025, dated 10.09.2025, suspending the petitioner's permanent authorization for the Fair Price Shop dealership (F.P. Shop No. 1244052), as illegal, arbitrary, without jurisdiction, violative of the principles of natural justice, contrary to the provisions of the A.P. State Targeted Public Distribution System (Control) Order, 2018 and G.O.Ms.No.32, dated 03.12.2018, and infringing Articles 14, 19(1)(g), 21 and 300-A of the Constitution of India set aside the same and consequently direct the respondents to restore the petitioner's authorization and permit her to continue as Fair Price Shop dealer and to pass such

IA NO: 1 OF 2026

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 the operation of the impugned proceedings in Rc.No.F/514/2025, dated 10.09.2025, and consequently direct the respondents to permit the petitioner to continue as Fair Price Shop dealer and pass such

The Court made the following order:

Challenging the proceedings issued by the Revenue Divisional Officer, vide Rc.No.F/514/2025, dated 10.09.2025 suspending the petitioner’s authorization for the Fair Price shop dealership (F.P Shop No.1244052), the present Writ Petition is filed.

Heard Sri K.Sakthi Niranjan Guptha, learned counsel for the petitioner and Sri Appasani Vineeth, learned Assistant Government Pleader for Civil Supplies and Sri S.Harinath Reddy, learned counsel for the Caveator- respondent No.5.

Learned counsel for the petitioner, while reiterating the contents of the writ affidavit would contend that respondent No.3, based on a report of the Tahsildar alleging that the petitioner was simultaneously holding the post of Sarpanch and functioning as a permanent Fair Price shop dealer, issued a show cause notice dated 01.09.2025, to which the petitioner submitted a detailed explanation dated 08.09.2025. He further submitted that respondent No.3, without properly considering the said explanation, issued the impugned proceedings dated 10.09.2025 suspending the petitioner’s Fair Price shop authorization and allotting the shop to respondent No.5. Therefore, the impugned suspension order is liable to be set aside. Accordingly, prayed to allow the writ petition.

Sri Appasani Vineeth, learned Assistant Government Pleader, justified the impugned order of suspension, contending that since the petitioner was continuing both as a Fair Price shop dealer and as Sarpanch, the Fair Price shop authorization of the petitioner was suspended pending final enquiry,in accordance with the provisions laid down in the Annexure to G.O.Ms.No.32 Consumer Affairs, Food & Civil Supplies (CS.I) Department, dated 03.12.2018. He would further contend that the writ petition being meritless deserves dismissal. Accordingly, prayed to dismiss the writ petition.

Perused the material available on record and considered the submissions made by learned counsel for the parties.

The petitioner’s FP shop dealership authorization was suspended pending enquiry.

There are certain guidelines framed for dealing the cases on alleged grounds of irregularities committed by the fair price shop dealers vide C.C.Memo.No.21/100/2015-ADI.PP-CCS dated 28.09.2015. The said guidelines have been framed by duly taking into consideration the judgments of this Court in W.P.No.30126 of 2014 & batch.

Clause (h) of the said guidelines is extracted hereunder for quick reference:

“h. The power of suspension under clause 5(5) of the Control Order includes the power to suspend the authorization pending enquiry and no show cause notice is necessary b