2025 Supreme(Online)(Tel) 46350
IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA AT HYDERABAD
THE HONOURABLE SMT JUSTICE T.MADHAVI DEVI
Vuchidi Kishan Reddy – Appellant
Versus
The State of Telangana – Respondent
WP 20398/2025
THE HONOURABLE SMT. JUSTICE T. MADHAVI DEVI WRIT PETITION NO.20398 OF 2025
O R D E R
In this Writ Petition, the petitioner is challenging the proceedings No.B/15/2024 dt.30.04.2025 issued by the 3rd respondent taking away 280 Food Security Cards from the petitioner and giving them to the 6th respondent without any notice to the petitioner and without conducting any enquiry and also the inaction of the official respondents in rationalizing and allotting 300 Food Security Cards to the petitioner, as illegal, arbitrary and in violation of principles of natural justice and consequently to direct the official respondents to rationalize and allot 300 Food Security Cards to the petitioner in terms of G.O.Rt.No.55, Consumer Affairs, Food & Civil Supplies (CSI-CCS) Department, dt.12.05.2015 and to pass such other order or orders.
2. Brief facts leading to the filing the present Writ Petition are that the petitioner was appointed as a dealer of Fair Price Shop No.3612041 situated at Markandeya Colony, Godavarikhani, Ramagundam Mandal, Peddapalli District on 26.06.2009 and the petitioner claims to be running the said shop without any complaints so far. It is submitted that subsequently the petitioner was appointed as incharge dealer of Fair Price Shop No.3612054 sitauted at Annapurna Colony, NTPC since the dealer of the said shop, i.e., the 7th respondent has become sick. However, after recovery, the 7th respondent submitted an application on
05.05.2025 to reinstate her as dealer of Fair Price Shop No.3612054.
3. It is submitted that in the year 2015, the Government issued G.O.Rt.No.55 dt.12.05.2015 for rationalisation of the cards fixing the limit of 800 to 1000 cards within Corporation limits for the economic viability of the fair price shops. The petitioner had 660 cards and therefore, he submitted an application to rationalize and allot a total of 1000 cards vide letter dt.25.11.2024. In view thereof, the 3rd respondent, vide letter dt.07.03.2025, directed respondents 4 and 5 to furnish the list of 300 Food Security Cards to be moved to the petitioner’s fair price shop and on 21.03.2025 the 4th respondent requested the 5th respondent to send the list of 300 Food Security Cards to be moved to the petitioner’s shop. In response thereto, on 24.03.2025, the 5th respondent furnished the list of 300 Food Security Cards to be moved to the petitioner’s shop from the fair price shop of the 6th respondent who has already a total of 1380 cards. Aggrieved by the same, the 6th respondent filed W.P.No.10414 of 2025 and this Court disposed of the said Writ Petition directing the respondents therein to consider the representation of the 6th respondent herein that several of the card holders of his Fair Price Shop have either died or shifted from the locality and therefore, the cards with the 6th respondent herein would be less than the required number of cards under G.O.Rt.No.55 dt.12.05.2015. The 6th respondent was permitted to make a representation to this effect. On 28.04.2025, the 6th respondent made a representation to the official respondents and on 30.04.2025, the 3rd respondent has passed an order restoring 280 Food Security Cards to the 6th respondent from the petitioner’s Fair Price Shop No.3612041. It is submitted that on 12.05.2025, the petitioner submitted a representation to rationalize and allot cards in terms of G.O.Rt.No.55 dt.12.05.2015, but the official respondents failed to consider the same. Therefore, the present Writ Petition is filed.
4. Learned counsel for the petitioner, while reiterating the submissions made in the writ affidavit, submitted that the 6th respondent had represented before this Court in the earlier Writ Petition in W.P.No.10414 of 2025 that there were several card holders who have either died or shifted from their places and therefore, number of such cards would have to be reduced and he sought an opportunity to make his submissions with regard to the cards and it was in these circumstances that this Court has