Suspension of a Fair Price Shop dealer's authorization pending enquiry is a precautionary measure to protect public interest and does not require the issuance of a show cause notice or prior consideration of explanations.

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 a writ, order or direction more particularly one in the nature of Writ of Mandamus declaring the action of the 4th respondent in issuing proceedings RC.No.B4/549/2026 dated 13.04.2026 by suspending the authorization of the petitioner as fair price shop dealer of F.P.Shop No. 1219007 of B.T.Project Village, Gummagatta Mandal, Anantapur Districtas illegal, arbitrary and violative of principles of natural justice 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 consequently set-aside the same and further direct the respondents to continue the petitioner to hold F.P.Shop No. 1219007 of B.T.Project Village, Gummagatta Mandal, Anantapur District and 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 may be pleased to direct the respondents to continue the petitioner as F.P. shop Dealer and to supply essential commodities to the petitioner’s F.P.Shop No. 1219007 of B.T.Project Village, Gummagatta Mandal, Anantapur District by suspending the proceedings of 4th respondent vide RC.No.B4/549/2026 dated 13.04.2026, pending disposal of Writ Petition and to pass such

The Court made the following:

ORDER

1. This Writ Petition is filed questioning the orders dated 13.04.2026 passed by respondent no.4 vide Rc.No.B4/549/2026 suspending the authorization of the petitioner as Fair Price Shop dealer of F.P.Shop No.1219007 of B.T.Project Village, Gummagatta Mandal, Anantapur District.

2. The case of the petitioner, in brief, is that she has been appointed as F.P. shop dealer on permanent basis in the year 2004 and her authorization is being renewed from time to time. While so, basing on the report dated 09.04.2006 of respondent no.5-Tahsildar, the respondent no.4-Revenue Divisional Officer, issued show cause notice dated 13.04.2026 and suspension order of the even date, for the show cause notice, the petitioner submitted his explanation dated 30.04.2026 stating that she was reappointed as F.P.shop dealer by virtue of the orders of the Hon’ble High Court and at the time of taking charge, she observed that there was shortage of 335 Kgs .of fortified rice and requested the previous dealer to handover, but the previous dealer did not handover and in that regard she submitted a representation dated 01.05.2025 to the Tahsildar, however, without considering the explanation the Revenue Divisional Officer suspended the F.P.shop authorization of the petitioner vide proceedings dated 13.04.2026. Hence the Writ Petition.

3. Heard Sri K.Narsi Reddy, learned counsel for the petitioner and Sri Vineeth Appasani, learned Assistant Government Pleader for Civil Supplies.

4. Sri K.Narsi Reddy, learned counsel for the petitioner, while reiterating the contents of the writ affidavit would contend that without considering the explanation submitted by the petitioner regarding shortgage of fortified rice and without conducting any enquiry and without examining any witnesses, the respondent no.4 suspended the authorization of the petitioner and therefore there is patent illegality and procedural irregularity in passing the suspension orders and hence they are liable to be set a