Allowed

Gosala Anjaneyulu, v. The State of Andhra Pradesh

Andhra Pradesh HC11 Nov 2019WP/11950/2019

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This writ petition challenges the illegal non-supply of essential commodities and arbitrary refusal to allow operations at a fair price shop without a formal suspension order. The court held that depriving a dealer of supplies without a cancellation or suspension order is arbitrary and directed the respondents to continue allocation.

What did the court decide?

Directing respondents to continue the petitioner as a Fair Price Shop dealer, allot essential commodities, and allow distribution to cardholders until dealership termination or a valid order under Cla

Gosala Anjaneyulu, Vs The State of Andhra… — Service and Employment | Andhra Pradesh HC (2019)

¶1

THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE M.SATYANARAYANA MURTHY WRIT PETITION No.11950 OF 2019

¶2

ORDER:-

¶3

This Writ Petition is filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India to issue Writ of Mandamus declaring the action of the Respondent Nos 2 to 4 herein in not supplying the Essential Commodities to the petitioner’s Fair Price Shop No.1243012 of Muddannagaripalli Village, Gandlapenta Mandal, Anantapuramu District, including seizure of records on 09.08.21019 by the 4^th respondent without following procedure is illegal and arbitrary and consequently to direct respondent Nos. 2 to 4 to supply the essential commodities to the petitioner’s Fair Price Shop No.1243012 of Muddannagaripalli Village, Gandlapenta Mandal, Anantapuramu District.

¶4

It is the case of the petitioner that he was appointed as Fair Price Shop No.1243012 of Muddannagaripalli Village, Gandlapenta Mandal, Anantapuramu District, for distribution of essential commodities to the card holders. On 09.08.2019, the Deputy Tahsildar along with Mandal Revenue Officer, Village Revenue Officer and other ruling political party leaders visited the petitioner’s Fair Price Shop and took signatures forcibly on papers stating that they found certain irregularities and conducted panchanama in the presence of panchayatdars and mediators and seized certain quantity of essential commodities along with record. In view of panchanama conducted by respondent No.3 and under the influence of local political pressure, the authorities did not allot

¶5

¶6

essential commodities to the petitioner’s fair price shop without their being any suspension or issuing any show cause notice.

¶7

In the absence of any cancellation or suspension order passed, exercising power under Clause 8(4) of the Andhra Pradesh Targeted Public Distribution System (Control) Order, 2018 (for short ‘the Control Order’), the petitioner is deemed to be continuing as fair price shop dealer and is entitled to distribute essential commodities to the card holders. But, the respondents are not issuing the essential commodities to the petitioner and are not allowing him to run the fair price shop, as such, the action of the respondents is illegal and arbitrary.

¶8

Learned counsel for the petitioner while reiterating the contentions placed reliance on the decision of Full Bench reported

¶9

in Oleti Tirupathamma v. District Supply Officer (City) Visakhapatnam and others¹ in support of his contention. On the strength of the principle laid down in the above judgment, learned counsel for petitioner requested to direct the respondents to allow the petitioner to run his fair price shop and to supply essential commodities to the cardholders.

¶10

Whereas, learned Assistant Government Pleader for Civil Supplies supported the action of the respondents in all aspects.

¶11

No doubt, when inspection was conducted by the officials of Civil Supplies Department and Revenue Department and found variation in the stock, they prepared panchanama during inspection seized the stock under the cover of panchanama.

¶12

During pendency of enquiry under Section 6-A of E.C. Act, no order under Clause 8 (4) of the Control Order, was passed, but still they are not allotting the essential commodities to the 1 2002 (1) ALD 577

¶13

¶14

petitioner’s fair price shop for distribution of the same to the cardholders.

¶15

Earlier, a similar question came up before the Full Bench of High Court of Andhra Pradesh in Oleti Tirupathamma V.District Supply Officer (City) Visakhapatnam and others (referred supra) wherein the Court held as follows –

¶16

“such action disabling fair price shop dealer to run the shop without any order of suspension or cancellation is illegal and arbitrary and issued such directions”.

¶17

Following the same judgment, learned Single Judge of this Court disposed of Writ Petition No.10396 of 2019 in favour of the petitioner therein.

¶18

In view of the law declared by Full Bench of High Court of Andhra Pradesh, I find that the action of the respondents is illegal and arbitrary. Therefore, the respondents are directed to continue the petitioner to hold the Fair Price Shop No.1243012 of Muddannagaripalli Village, Gandlapenta Mandal, Anantapuramu District and to allot essential commodities to the petitioner by allowing him to distribute the same to the card holders, allotted to his fair price shop, till his dealership is terminated or till passing an order under Clause 8(4) of then Control Order, 2018.

¶19

With the above direction, the writ petition is disposed of. No

¶20

costs.

¶21

Consequently, miscellaneous applications pending, if any, shall stand closed.

¶22

_________________________________________ JUSTICE M.SATYANARAYANA MURTHY

¶23

Date: 11.11.2019 sp

Gosala Anjaneyulu, v. The State of Andhra Pradesh

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Gosala Anjaneyulu, v. The State of Andhra Pradesh

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Cases cited

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

K G Sugadhan Vs Sri Nageswaraswamy Devastanam

P.Lakshmi Naidu Vs State of Ap

M/s, Indus Towers Limited, Vs The State of Andhra Pradesh

M Adinarayana Reddy Vs The State of Andhra Pradesh

Devaboina Hazarathaiah Vs The State of Andhra Pradesh

Smt.L.Lakshmi Kala Vs The Joint Collector