Korada Lakshmibhai Vs The State of Andhra Pradesh

Petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India is filed praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed therewith, the High Court may be pleased to Issue a Writ or Order or Direction more particularly one in the Nature of a Writ of Mandamus declaring the action of the Respondents 2 to 5 trying to bifurcate the Petitioner's Fair Price Shop

¶17

No.0121761 of Dandu Laxmi Puram, Polaki Mandal, Srikakulam District unlawfully, in violation of procedure as contemplated under the law Violation of this Hon'ble Court Order passed in W.P. No.22027/2024 dt.0110-2024 , Violation of A.P., State Public Distribution System Control Order, Violation of principles of Natural Justice , Violation of Article 14,19 of the Constitution of India Consequently to direct the Respondents² to 5 to Continue the Petitioners Fair Price Shop No.0121761 of Dandu Laxmi Puram, Polaki Mandal, Srikakulam District without bifurcation , except by Strictly follow the order of this Hon’ble Court in W.P. No.22027/2024 dt.0110-2024

¶18

lA NO: 1 OF 2025

¶19

Petition under Section 151 CPC is filed praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed in support of the petition, the High Court may be pleased to direct the respondents 2 to 5 not to Bifurcation of the Petitioner's Fair Price Shop No.0121761 of Dandu Laxmi Puram, Polaki Mandal, Srikakulani District pending disposal of the main Writ Petition

¶20

Counsel for the Petitioner: SRI R SIVA SAI SWARUP

¶21

Counsel for the Respondents: GP FOR CIVIL SUPPLIES

¶22

The Court made the following: Order

¶23

1

¶24

BSB, J W.P.No.1023 of 2025

¶25

APHC010014122025

¶26

IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH

¶27

AT AMARAVATI

¶28

[3311]

¶29

(Special Original Jurisdiction)

¶30

FRIDAY JHE TENTH DAY OF JANUARY TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE

¶31

PRESENT

¶32

THE HONOURABLE MS JUSTICE B S BHANUMATHI

¶33

WRIT PETITION NO: 1023/2025

Between:

Korada Lakshmibhai

...PETITIONER

AND

The State Of Andhra Pradesh and Others ...RESPONDENT(S)

¶39

Counsel for the Petitioner:

¶40

1.R Siva Sai Swarup

¶41

Counsel for the Respondent(S):

¶42

1.GP for Civil Supplies

¶43

The Court made the following: ORDER:

¶44

This Writ Petition under Article 226 of Constitution of India is filed for the following relief:

¶45

...to Issue a Writ or Order or Direction more particularly one in the Nature of a Writ of Mandamus declaring the^action of the Respondents No.2 to 5 trying to bifurcate the^Petitioners Fair Price Shop No.0121761 of Dandu Laxmi Puram, Polaki Mandal, Srikakulam District unlawfully, in violation of procedure as contemplated under the law Violation of this Honble Court Order passed in W.P.No.22027/2024,

¶46

2

¶47

BSB, J W.P.No.1023 of 2025

¶48

dt.01.10.2024 Violation of A.P.State Public Distribution System Control Order, Violation of principles of Natural Justice, Violation of Article 14,19 of the Constitution^ofIndia Consequently to direct the Respondents No.2 to 5 to^Continue the Petitioners Fair Price Shop No.0121761 of Dandu^Laxmi Puram, Polaki Mandal, Srikakulam District, without^bifurcation except by Strictly follow the order of this Hon’ble Court in W.P.No.22027/2024 dt.01.10.2024...

¶49

The learned counsel for the petitioner contended that^{intheimpugned} notice no details as to how may cards were sought to^{beremovedfromthe} shop of the petitioner after the proposed time was^indicated. He further submitted that such vague notice is against the directions^ofthe Division Bench of this Court in W.P.No.22027 of 2024 dated 01.10.2024.

¶50

In reply, learned Assistant Government Pleader for Civil Supplies placed on written instructions. District Civil Supply Officer, Srikakulam contended that the petitioner can submit the explanation^{sinceG.O.Ms.No.35,} Consumer Affairs, Food & Civil Supplies (CS.l) Department,^{dated03.12.2018} would be violative and therefore there is no ground to challenge the notice. He further submitted decision on the explanation been^{takenoftheauthorities.} 4. The learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that^{thenoticeitselfis} illegal being violative the directions of the Division^Bench. Therefore, it is liable to be set aside.

¶51

Perused the record as rightly contended by the petitioner,^{noticeisutter} violation of the decision of the Division Bench cited supra and as such, the same is liable to be set aside.

¶52

3

¶53

BSB, J W.P.No.l023 of 2025

¶54