Back
2026 Supreme(Online)(AP) 21444
IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI
Ravi Cheemalapati, J
M. Marenna – Appellant
Versus
The State of Andhra Pradesh – Respondent
WRIT PETITION NO: 2240/2021
For the Appellants/Petitioners: Hanumantha Rao Vellalachervu
For the Respondents: GP for Revenue, GP for Civil Supplies
The court emphasized that disciplinary enquiries against fair price shop dealers must be concluded promptly as per the statutory timeline provided in the AP State Targeted Public Distribution System (Control) Order, 2018, to prevent undue hardship and ensure system efficiency.
Headnote:(A) Public Distribution System - Dealership Suspension - Timely disposal of disciplinary cases - Clause 8(4)(2) of the Andhra Pradesh State Targeted Public Distribution System (Control) Order, 2018 mandates that disciplinary cases against fair price shop dealers should be disposed of as early as possible, preferably within three months, to ensure the convenience of cardholders and smooth functioning of the system. (Para 7)
Issues: Whether the suspension of the fair price shop dealership can be continued indefinitely without the conclusion of the disciplinary enquiry.
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. challenge to the suspension of fair price shop dealership and arguments regarding the lack of reasoned orders. (Para 1 , 2 , 3 , 4) |
| 2. review of the statutory requirement for the timely completion of disciplinary enquiries under the pds control order. (Para 5 , 6 , 7 , 8) |
| 3. direction to conclude the enquiry expeditiously and extension of interim protection. (Para 9 , 10) |
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 Writ and Order or Direction more particularly one in the nature of Writ of Mandamus declare the action of the respondents, particularly the 2nd respondent in passing Impugned Order in Appeal Petition No.CS3/225/2020 dated 15.10.2020 upholding the Orders issued by the respondents No.3 and 4 i.e. cancelling and suspending the dealership of the petitioner to the Fair Price Shop No.1325011 of Pedda Horthur Village, Alur Mandal, Kurnool District as illegal, arbitrary, improper, unjust, contrary to provisions under Andhra Pradesh State Targeted Public Distribution System (Control) Order, 2018 and in violation of principles of natural justice guaranteed under Article 14 and 16 of the Constitution of India and consequently set-aside impugned Order in Appeal Petition No.CS3/225/2020 dated 15.10.2020, direct the respondents to continue the petitioner as Dealer of Fair Price Shop No.1325011 of Pedda Horthur Village, Alur Mandal, Kurnool District and pass
IA NO: 1 OF 2021
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 continue the petitioner as Dealer of Fair Price Shop No.1325011 of Pedda Horthur Village, Alur Mandal, Kurnool District by suspending the Order in Appeal Petition No.CS3/225/2020 dated 15.10.2020, which was issued by the 2nd respondent, pending disposal of the writ petition and pass
The Court made the following:
ORDER:
1. Impugning the order in Appeal Petition No.CS3/225/2020 dated 15.10.2020 upholding the orders issued by the 3rd & 4th respondents suspending the dealership of the petitioner to the fair price shop No.1325011 of Pedda Horthur Village, Alur Mandal, Kurnool District, the present writ petition is filed.
2. Heard Smt S.Lakshmi Prameela, learned counsel representing Sri V.Hanumanthu Rao, learned counsel for the petitioner and Sri Appasani Vineeth, learned Assistant Government Pleader for Civil Supplies for the respondents.
3. Learned counsel for the petitioner while reiterating the contents of the writ affidavit would contend that the 2nd respondent passed the impugned orders in Appeal Petition No.CS3/225/2020 dated 15.10.2020 confirming the orders issued by the 3rd & 4th respondents, in a mechanical way, suspended the authorization of the petitioner without giving reasons in violation of the orders passed by this Court in K. Prabhavathi vs. State of A.P. 12020(6) ALD 209, 2026:APHC:21942, therefore, the impugned suspension order is liable to be set aside. Accordingly, prayed to allow the writ petition.
4. Sri Appasani Vineeth, learned Assistant Government Pleader, on written instructions dated 23.04.2026, justified the impugned order of suspension contending that as the authorities found variation in between fortified rice, suspended the authorization of the petitioner, pending final enquiry, after following the procedure contemplated under law. He would further contend that the writ petition being meritless deserves dismissal. 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. The petitioner’s Fair Price shop dealership authorization was suspended pending enquiry. This Court vide orders dated 03.02.2021, granted interim orders.
7. Clause 8(4)(2) of the Andhra Pradesh Targeted Public Distri
