(Special Original Jurisdiction)

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 questioning the action of the 3rd respondent in not passing any order with regard to suspension of authorization of Fair Price Shop dealer of Shop.No.0789030 of M.R.Nagar, Bapatia Town, Bapatia District Erstwhile Guntur District by completing the enquiry with regard to the proceedings Rc.No.3821/2016/D dated 17.06.2016 is illegal, arbitrary and violative of principles of natural justice and pass

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 direct the respondents to complete the enquiry with regard to the cancellation of authorization of Shop.No.0789030 of M.R.Nagar, Bapatla Town, Bapatla District Erstwhile Guntur District, pending disposal of Writ Petition and to pass

The Court made the following:

ORDER:

1. The grievance of the petitioner is that the respondents are not passing any orders with regard to suspension of Fair Price Shop authorization in respect of his Shop No.0789030 of M.R.Nagar, Bapatla Town, Bapatla District Erstwhile Guntur District, by completing enquiry with regard to the proceedings vide Rc.No.3821/2016/D dated 17.06.2016.

2. Heard Sri M.K.Raj Kumar, learned counsel for the petitioner and Sri Vineeth Appasani, learned Assistant Government Pleader for Civil Supplies.

3. Learned counsel for the petitioner, while reiterating the contents of the writ affidavit would contend that the authorities, alleging variations in the ground balance of commodities found during inspection of the Fair Price shop, initiated 6A proceedings against the petitioner in the year 2016. The 3rd respondent passed interim custody order of the commodities without any order of cancellation or suspension of the authorization of the petitioner. He would further contend that the despite lapse of 10 years, the respondents did not conclude the enquiry with respect to cancellation of the petitioner’s authorization. At present, temporary dealer is supplying essential commodities to the cardholders. He further submitted that as per Control Order, 2018, enquiry has to be completed within three months, further, stoppage of supply of essential commodities since 10 years without suspension or cancellation of the Fair Price Shop authorization is illegal and arbitrary. Accordingly, prayed to allow the writ petition.

4. Sri Vineeth Appasani, learned Assistant Government Pleader, submitted that the issue is of the year 2016 and the respondents are unable to trace out the record, however, he fairly conceded that the authorities cannot stop supply of essential commodities, unless the Fair Price shop authorization of the petitioner is either suspended or cancelled and in the instant case there was neither suspension nor cancellation of the authorization and the authorities, if intend, would take steps in accordance with law against the irregularities, if any, committed by the petitioner. He further submitted that the petitioner approached this Court after 10 years, as such, the writ petition is liable to be dismissed, accordingly, prayed to dismiss the writ petition.

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

6. As could be seen from the facts and circumstances of the case and the material available on record, the respondent authorities stopped supplying essential commodities to the petitioner’s fair price shop without there being any suspension or cancellation of petitioner’s authorization. Admittedly, 6-A enquiry has been initiated and orders have been passed, however, no further disciplinary enquiry has been initiated.

7. A