Disposed

T Gurunath v. The State of Andhra Pradesh

Andhra Pradesh HC1 Nov 2021WP/670/2018

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The court declared the suspension of the petitioner's Fair Price Shop dealership illegal. It directed the competent authority to complete the enquiry after issuing a show-cause notice and directed the supply of essential commodities to the petitioner pending the enquiry.

What did the court decide?

Directed respondents to complete enquiry after notice, supply essential commodities pending enquiry, and Writ Petition disposed.

T Gurunath Vs The State of Andhra Pradesh — Service and Employment | Andhra Pradesh HC (2021)

¶1

HON’BLE SMT JUSTICE KONGARA VIJAYA LAKSHMI

¶2

Writ Petition No.670 of 2018

¶3

Order:

¶4

This Writ Petition is filed to declare the action of the third respondent in suspending the Fair Price Shop dealership of the petitioner vide proceedings dated 14.11.2017 as illegal and arbitrary.

¶5

The case of the petitioner is that he is the Fair Price Shop dealer of Shop No.20 of Narsipalle village, Uyyalawada Mandal, Kurnool district; while so, the impugned order dated 14.11.2017 suspending the authorization of the petitioner has been passed by the third respondent basing on the report submitted by the fourth respondent on 09.11.2017; the said suspension order is based on vague allegations; even though an allegation is made that the petitioner is not residing in the village, he is very much residing in the village and running Fair Price shop from the authorized premises; Mr. P. Shiva Sankar Reddy, who is alleged to be a binami, is a person whose name is entered in the Aadhar enabled Public Distribution System Card as nominee and hence the suspension order is passed without application of mind; petitioner preferred an appeal along with stay petition on 30.11.2017 before the Joint Collector challenging the said suspension order, but so far no orders thereon have been passed. Hence, the Writ Petition.

¶6

Counter affidavit is filed by the third respondent stating that the appeal filed by the petitioner was disposed of by the Joint Collector on 23.12.2017 directing the Revenue Divisional Officer, Nandyal to take necessary disciplinary action and pass appropriate orders.

¶7

Heard learned counsel for the petitioner Ms. Thota Suneetha and learned Assistant Government Pleader for the respondents.

¶8

¶9

As seen from the impugned order, the following lapses were found

¶10

at the time of inspection of the petitioner’s Fair Price Shop.

¶11

“1. The original FP shop dealer Sri P. Gurunath is

¶12

not residing in the village.

¶13

Sri P. Siva Sankar Reddy, a binami person who is not related to original F.P. Shop dealer is distributing ECs to the cardholders.

¶14

F.P. Shop is running in un-authorized premises.

¶15

No valid authorization is found in the premises.

¶16

No valid license or permission is produced to store the PDS commodities at H.No.2-100D of Narsipalle village.

¶17

No stock cum price board is displayed.”

¶18

The first allegation is that the petitioner is not residing in the village, but the learned counsel for the petitioner submits that as per Aadhar card the petitioner is resident of same village and in fact he is residing in the same village. The second allegation is that Sri P. Siva Sankar Reddy, a binami person who is not related to the dealer is distributing the essential commodities to the cardholders, but as seen from the Aadhar enabled public distribution system card, the said P. Siva Sankar Reddy is nominee No.1 to the petitioner herein and nominee is entitled to run the Fair Price Shop. The third allegation is that the petitioner is running the shop in unauthorized premises, but the learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner is running the shop in authorized premises only and with regard to other allegations that no valid authorization is found in the premises and no valid license or permission is produced to store the commodities, learned counsel for the petitioner submits that they are readily available in the premises. Another

¶19

¶20

allegation is that no stock cum price board is displayed. Learned counsel for the petitioner denies the said allegation.

¶21

This Court, on 05.01.2018, while ordering notice before admission granted interim suspension of the impugned proceedings, however it was made clear that the competent authority can pass final orders after issuing show cause notice to the petitioner.

¶22

As seen from the counter affidavit, the appeal filed by the petitioner challenging the suspension order was disposed of on 23.12.2017 directing the Revenue Divisional Officer, Nandyal to take necessary disciplinary action against the petitioner.

¶23

In view of the facts and circumstances of the case and as the issue as to whether the petitioner is running the Fair Price Shop in authorized premises or in unauthorized premises can be decided in the enquiry, the respondents are directed to complete the enquiry initiated against the petitioner, after giving notice and reasonable opportunity of hearing to the petitioner, as expeditiously as possible. As there is interim suspension of the impugned proceedings, the respondents are directed to supply the essential commodities to the petitioner, pending enquiry.

¶24

With the above directions, the Writ Petition is disposed of. There shall be no order as to costs.

¶25

As a sequel thereto, the miscellaneous applications, if any, pending in this Writ Petition, shall stand closed.

¶26

_____________________________ KONGARA VIJAYA LAKSHMI, J

¶27

Date:01.11.2021 Nsr

¶28

¶29

HON’BLE SMT JUSTICE KONGARA VIJAYA LAKSHMI

¶30

Writ Petition No.670 of 2018

¶31

Date:01.11.2021

¶32

Nsr

T Gurunath v. The State of Andhra Pradesh

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

T Gurunath 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

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

P N Raju Vs the State of Ap

J E Rao Vs the State of Ap

A.Yogeswara Reddy, Vs The Joint Collector

Randhi Asha Jyothi Vs Randhi Vishnu

Mirthipati (Nemala) Lalitha Kumari Vs Mirthipati Murali Krishna

T Swathi Vs Y Naveen Kumar