IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS Dated : 06.01.2026 CORAM THE HONOURABLE Ms. JUSTICE P.T. ASHA A.Loganathan ... Petitioner Vs.

1.The District Collector Thiruvannamalai District Thiruvannamalai – 606 604.

2.The District Supply and Consumer Protection Officer O/o. District Collector Vengikal Thiruvannamalai – 606 604.

3.The Joint Registrar Co-operative Societies Thiruvannamalai District.

4.The Taluk Supply and Consumer Protection Officer Taluk Office Arani, Thiruvannamalai – 632 301.

5.The Assistant Registrar Public Distribution Scheme Arani Thiruvannamalai District. ... Respondents Prayer: Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying to issue a Writ of Certiorarified Mandamus to call for the records and quash the order passed by the 5^th respondent vide Na.Ka.No.112/2022 GDS2 dated 29.02.2024 and direct the respondents to open the part time ration shop in the petitioner village and pass orders.

For Petitioner : Mr.N.Ranganathan For Respondents : Ms.R.L.Karthika Government Advocate for R1 to R5

ORDER

Aggrieved by the rejection of his request in providing a part time ration shop, the petitioner is before this Court.

2. The facts which give rise to this petitioner are herein below set out : a) The petitioner is the resident of Kunnathur Village, Arani Taluk, Tiruvannamalai District. According to the petitioner, there are more than 3800 people living in his village, and 1212 families possess ration cards. He would submit that his village has only one full time fair price shop running under the control of Primary Agricultural Cooperative Ration shop, and all the ration card holders are depending on the said ration shop. The villagers faced many problems at the time of procuring the essential commodities from the fair price shops, including the staff working in the fair price shop in distributing the commodities. In order to get rid of this situation, the petitioner on behalf of the villagers had made a representation to the fourth respondent on 26.12.2020 to open a part-time fair price shop in his village and to re-allocate the card holders. The representation of the petitioner was forwarded to the third respondent for further action. However, there was no response.

b) The fourth respondent had required the petitioner to arrange for a private building to run the part time ration shop at the cost of the villagers.

c) Vide representation dated 22.07.2021, the petitioner and the villagers had consented to it and had also given in writing that they are agreeable to pay the rentals and electricity charges amount incurred in running the part time ration shop. The owner of the premises had also consented to provide a private building to run the part time ration shop at free of cost.

d) This apart, on 02.10.2021, a resolution was passed in the Grama Sabha meeting with reference to establishing a new part time ration shop in the petitioner's village.

e) A further representation was made on 27.05.2022 to the third respondent and all necessary details required by the authorities were providedby the villagers with a fond hope that a part time ration shop will be opened in their village shortly.

f) However, this request has been turned down on two grounds. As per the Fair Price Shop Rules, the first ground is that the minimum distance between the main ration shop and part time ration shop must be 1.5 mtrs., whereas the place at which the proposed ration shop is intended to open, is hardly 500 mtrs., away from the main ration shop. The second ground in the impugned order is that the proposed building in which the part time ration shop is made to run, should belong to Government or Panchayat.

Aggrieved by the impugned order, the petitioner is before this Court.

3. The third respondent has filed the counter affidavit in which he has stated the eligibility criteria for opening a part time shop, and the same reads as follows :

1. To bifurcate the part time shop from the full-time shop there should be a minimum of 150 family car