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

2026 Supreme(Online)(AP) 21512

HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH
RAVI CHEEMALAPATI
MELAM VIJAYA LAKSHMI – Appellant
Versus
THE STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH – Respondent
WP 10196/2026



##PAGE1##

2026:APHC:21894

APHC010198692026

IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH

AT AMARAVATI [3332]

(Special Original Jurisdiction)

MONDAY, THE TWENTIETH DAY OF APRIL

TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY SIX

PRESENT

THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE RAVI CHEEMALAPATI

WRIT PETITION NO: 10196/2026

Between:

1. MELAM VIJAYA LAKSHMI, W/O NAGESWARA RAO, AGED ABOUT

53 YEARS, DEALER OF F.P.SHOP NO.0483078, R/O H.NO.70-2-

95/2, VINAYAKA NAGAR, KAKINADA, KAKINADA MANDAL,

KAKINADA DISTRICT.

...PETITIONER

AND

1. THE STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH, REPRESENTED BY ITS

PRINCIPAL SECRETARY ( CONSUMER AFFAIRS AND CIVIL

SUPPLIES DEPARTMENT), SECRETARIAT, VELAGAPUDI, GUNTUR

DISTRICT.

2. THE JOINT COLLECTOR, KAKINADA DISTRICT AT KAKINADA.

3. THE REVENUE DIVISIONAL OFFICER, KAKINADA URBAN-I,

KAKINADA, KAKINADA DISTRICT.

4. THE TAHSILDAR, KAKINADA URBAN MANDAL-I, KAKINADA,

KAKINADA DISTRICT.

5. THE DEPUTY TAHSILDAR, CIVIL SUPPLIES, KAKINADA URBAN-I,

KAKINADA, KAKINADA DISTRICT.

6. D JAYASRI, W/O NOT KNOWN. AGED ABOUT 45 YEARS, FP SHOP

DEALER (88 MS) F.P.SHOP NO.0483079, RAMANAIAHPETA,

KAKINADA, KAKINADA URBAN-I, KAKINADA DISTRICT.

...RESPONDENT(S):

##PAGE2##

2

2026:APHC:21894

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 pass an Order or a Direction or a Writ more in the nature of Writ of

Mandamus by declaring the action of the 5th Respondent in suspending the

Petitioner's dealership of FPS No. 0483078 at Vinayaka Nagar, Kakinada

Urban-I, Kakinada District without issuing a written order, registering a case

under Section 6A of the Essential Commodities Act, 1955, and handing over

the shop to the 6th Respondent without cross-verifying variations

(excess/deficit) in rice and sugar against electronic Point of Sale generated

prints as arbitrary, autocratic, illegal, ultra vires, violative of principles Clause

12(p)(3) of the AP TPDS Control Order 2018 and against principles of natural

justice consequently direct Respondents 1 to 5 to forthwith restore the

Petitioner's dealership to F.P Shop No.0483078 in the interests of 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

pass an interim Order by way of Direction by directing the Respondents 1 to 5

herein to restore the dealership to the Petitioner herein for F.P.Shop No.

0483078 at Vinayaka Nagar, Kakinada Urban-I, Kakinada District pending

disposal of the main Writ Petition on the file of this Hon'ble Court in the

interests of justice and pass

Counsel for the Petitioner:

1. M/S.ASTONISH LAWS

Counsel for the Respondent(S):

1. GP FOR CIVIL SUPPLIES

##PAGE3##

3

2026:APHC:21894

The Court made the following order:

Aggrieved by the action of respondent No.5 in suspending the

petitioner’s dealership in respect of shop No.0483078 situated at D.No.70-3A-

15, Vinayak Nagar, Kakinada Urban-1, Kakinada District, without issuing a

written order, registering a case under Section 6A of Essential Commodities

Act, 1955 and handing over the shop to respondent No.6 without cross

verifying variations in rice and sugar with reference to the e-POS printed bills

and the stock, the present Writ Petition is filed.

2. Heard Sri Chandra Sekhar Ilapakurti, learned counsel representing M/s

Astonish Laws, learned counsel for the petitioner and Sri Appasani Vineeth,

learned Assistant Government Pleader for Civil Supplies appearing for the

respondents.

3. Learned counsel for the petitioner, while reiterating the contents of the

writ affidavit contended that the petitioner was appointed as a permanent

dealer to the subject shop. He further contended that on 05.04.2026 at about

5.30 P.M., respondent No.5 along with Village Revenue Officers of

Vaidyanagar, Kakinada Urban-1, inspected the subject shop and found

alleged variations of 10.89% in PDS rice and 0.27% in sugar stock. Based on

the said variations, respondent No.5 registered a case under Section 6-A of

the Essential Commodities Act

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
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon Back to top