Kilaparthi Kalpana Vs the State of Andhra Pradesh

KILAPARTHI KALPANA, D/O K. ATCHIYYA, AGED ABOUT 36 YEARS, OCC. FAIR SHOP DEALER, R/O. D. NO. 2-58(2), LINGAPURAM VILLAGE, KOTAVURTIA MANDAL, VISHAKAPATNAM DISTRICT.

¶11

...PETITIONER

¶12

AND

¶13

THE STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH, REP. BY ITS PRINCIPAL SECRETARY, CONSUMER AFFAIRS AND CIVIL SUPPLIES DEPARTMENT, SECRETARIAT BUILDINGS, VELAGAPUDI, AMARAVATI, GUNTUR DISTRICT. .

¶14

THE SUBCOLLECTOR, NARSIPATNAM, VISHAKAPATNAM DISTRICT..

¶15

THE TAHSILDAR, KOTAVURTIA MANDAL, VISHAKAPATNAM DISTRICT.

¶16

...RESPONDENT(S):

¶17

Petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed therewith, the High Court may be pleased to issue a Writ of Mandamus or any other appropriate Writ Order or direction declaring the in action of the 2nd respondent in not considering the representation of the petitioner to appoint the petitioner as a Fair Price Shop Dealer compassionate grounds for Shop. No. 07 situated at Lingapuram Village, on Kotavurtia Mandal, Visakhapatnam District is illegal, arbitrary and

¶18

2

¶19

VS,J W.P.No.1258 of 2025

¶20

violation of principles of natural justice consequently direct the 2nd respondent to appoint the petitioner as a Fair Price Shop Dealer on compassionate grounds for Shop. No. 07 situated at Lingapuram Village, Kotavurtia Mandal, Visakhapatnam District and pass

¶21

IA NO: 1 OF 2025

¶22

Petition under Section 151 CPC praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed in support of the petition, the High Court may be pleased pleased to direct the 2nd respondent to appoint the petitioner as a Fair Price Shop Dealer on compassionate grounds for Shop. No. 07 situated at Lingapuram Village, Kotavurtia Mandal, Visakhapatnam District pending disposal of the above Writ Petition and pass

¶23

Counsel for the Petitioner:

¶24

1.K SRINIVAS

¶25

Counsel for the Respondent(S):

¶26

1.GP FOR CIVIL SUPPLIES

¶27

The Court made the following:

¶28

3

¶29

VS,J W.P.No.1258 of 2025

¶30

ORDER:

¶31

The present writ petition came to be filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India seeking the following relief:

¶32

“…to issue a Writ of Mandamus or any other appropriate Writ Order or direction declaring the in action of the 2^nd respondent in not considering the representation of the petitioner to appoint the petitioner as a Fair Price Shop Dealer on compassionate grounds for Shop. No.07 situated at Lingapuram Village, Kotavurtla Mandal, Visakhapatnam District is illegal, arbitrary and violation of principles of natural justice consequently direct the 2^nd respondent to appoint the petitioner as a Fair Price Shop Dealer on compassionate grounds for Shop. No. 07 situated at Lingapuram Village, Kotavurtla Mandal, Visakhapatnam District….”

¶33

The petitioner’s late father served as a Fair Price Shop Dealer for Shop No.7 situated at Lingapuram Village, Kotavurtla Mandal, Visakhapatnam District. While in service, he died on 29.07.2018, leaving behind the petitioner and her sister.

¶34

The case of the petitioner is that she is the President & Secretary of Apurupa Self Help Group, Lingapuram Village, Kotavurtla Mandal and in that capacity, she was appointed as a Fair Price Shop dealer under SHG by the 2^nd respondent to the subject Fair Price Shop. Thereafter, she also submitted a representation dated 31.08.2018 to respondents No.2 and 3 seeking appointment as Fair Price Shop Dealer on compassionate grounds in pursuance of G.O.Ms.No.4, Consumer Affairs, Food and Civil Supplies (CS-I)

¶35

4

¶36

VS,J W.P.No.1258 of 2025

¶37

Department, dated 28.02.2014. Pursuant to the said representation, the 3^rd respondent recommended the appointment of the petitioner on compassionate grounds to the 2^nd respondent on 24.06.2019. However, in spite of the same, as no further orders have been passed appointing the petitioner on compassionate grounds, the petitioner is constrained to file the present writ petition.

¶38

As the petitioner has one more sister, the petitioner filed a memo dated 08.12.2025 duly enclosing the consent given by her sister for appointing the petitioner as a Fair Price Shop dealer.

¶39

Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned Assistant Government Pleader for Civil Supplies.

¶40

During the course of arguments, learned Assistant Government Pleader for Civil Supplies contended that the petitioner is a married person and that she cannot be appointed on compassionate grounds on the demise of her father. Whereas, the learned counsel for the petitioner relied upon a decision of this Court in Gochipatha Kalyani vs. State of Andhra Pradesh¹ , wherein this Court held as follows:

¶41

“15. For all the aforesaid reasons, this Court is of the considered view that the married daughter is also entitled for compassionate appointment. The impugned order, rejecting the petitioner’s claim for appointment on compassionate ground, only on the ground that the

¶42

1 2022 SCC OnLine AP 913

¶43

5

¶44

VS,J W.P.No.1258 of 2025

¶45

petitioner is married daughter of the deceased, cannot be sustained. The impugned order is therefore quashed.”

¶46

Having regard to the settled preposition of law and the considering that

¶47

the facts of the present case are covered by the above-cited decision, the Writ Petition is disposed of directing the 2^nd respondent consider the petitioner’s representation dated 31.08.2018 for appointment on compassionate grounds in pursuance of G.O.Ms.No.4 Consumer Affairs, Food and Civil Supplies (CS-I) Department dated 28.02.2014 and in accordance with the proposals submitted by the 3^rd respondent, without raising any objection on the ground that the petitioner is a married daughter. The said exercise shall be completed within a period of two (2) months from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. There shall be no order as to costs.

¶48

Miscellaneous petitions pending, if any, in this writ petition shall stand closed.

¶49

_ __________________

¶50

JUSTICE V.SUJATHA

¶51

Date: 10.12.2025 KGR

Kilaparthi Kalpana v. the State of Andhra Pradesh

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Kilaparthi Kalpana v. the State of Andhra Pradesh

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Why is it important?

What the court decided

Issues for consideration

Cases cited

Statutes considered

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Gudisa Sarada Vs the State of Ap

M/S. Vallabhaneni Constructions Private Limited Vs the State of Andhra Pradesh

Vsr Constructions Vs the State of Andhra Pradesh

Ambati Mallikarjuna Vs the State of Ap

Gudiseva Nagendram Vs the State of Andhra Pradesh

M/S Pvr Structures India Private Limited, Vs The State of Andhra Pradesh