(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 an appropriate Writ, Order or Direction, more particularly one in the nature of Writ of Mandamus, to declare the action of the respondent No. 3 in issuing the impugned order bearing Procs. No. 983/2025 dt. 10-3-2025 cancelling the Fair Price Shop Dealership of Shop No. 0282004 of the petitioner society, without properly considering the explanation submitted by the petitioner dt. 14-2-2025 to the show caue notice issued by the 4th respondent bearing No. 533/2025/CSDT/ dt. 13-2-2025 and without affording reasonable opportunity of being heard, as being illegal, arbitrary, unjust and unconstitutional and consequently set aside the same, and to grant such

IA NO: 1 OF 2025

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 Respondent authorities to continue the petitioner as Fair price shop dealer of Shop No. 0282004 of Salur (Urban) village, Salur Mandal, Parvathipuram Manyam District by suspending the impugned order bearing Procs. No. 983/2025 dt. 10-3-2025, pending disposal of the main Writ Petition, and to pass

IA NO: 2 OF 2025

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 vacate the interim order dated 20.03.2025 passed in W.P.No. 7224 of 2025 and dismiss the Writ Petition 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 implead the proposed Respondent No. 5 in WP. No. 7224 of 2025 and permit the consequential amendment to the writ petition and pass

The Court made the following:

ORDER:

Questioning the orders passed by the 3rd respondent in Rc.No.155/2025 dated 13.03.2025 (wrongly mentioned as Procs.No.983/2025 dated 10.03.2025), cancelling the fair price shop dealership in respect of Shop No.0282004, the present writ petition is filed.

Heard Sri Venna Hemanth Kumar, learned counsel for the petitioner and Sri Appasani Vineeth, learned Assistant Government Pleader for Civil Supplies for the respondents.

Learned counsel for the petitioner while reiterating the contents of the writ affidavit submitted that despite the directions given by the Division Bench of this Court in W.A.Nos.139 & 122 of 2025, the authorities are not conducting proper enquiry while cancelling the authorization of the dealers. In the present case, a show cause notice has been issued asking the petitioner to submit explanation as to why her authorization should not be cancelled, for which the petitioner submitted her explanation dated 14.02.2025. He further submitted that the reason for initiating disciplinary proceedings is that the one Sri Sondi Suresh & others, have given a complaint against the petitioner's dealership. He further submitted that when such complaint has been given by some third parties/card holders, it is bounden duty cast upon the RDO to enquire the said persons in the presence of the petitioner, so that the petitioner will an opportunity to cross-examine them. Learned counsel further submitted that the 3rd respondent has relied on the report of the Tahsildar and based its decision and report was never supplied to the petitioner and passed the impugned orders. In the said circumstances, the order impugned is passed behind the back of the petitioner which amounts to violation of principles of natural justice. As such, the order impugned is liable to be set aside, accordingly, prayed to allow the writ petition.

Per contra, learned Assistant Government Pleader for Civil Supplies while justifying the orders passed by the 3rd respondent contended that there is neither illegality nor impropr