Smt P Subhashini Vs the State of Andhra Pradesh

Smt. P. Subhashini, W/o Sreenivasulu, Aged 42 years, Occ; F.P. Shop Dealer, F.P. shop No 1127008, 11 and 12'*^ Ward of Chennuru, Chennur Village and Mandal, YSR Kadapa District.

¶10

...PETITIONER

¶11

AND

¶12

The State of Andhra Pradesh, Rep. by its Principal Secretary, Consumer Affairs, Food and Civil Supplies Department, Secretariat, Amaravathi, Guntur District.

¶13

The District Collector, YSR Kadapa District.

¶14

The Joint Collector, YSR Kadapa District.

¶15

The Sub Collector cum Revenue Divisional Officer, YSR Kadapa, YSR Kadapa District.

¶16

The Tahsildar, Chennur, YSR Kadapa District..

¶17

...RESPONDENTS

¶18

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 direction declaring the proceedings vide Ref.No.F/717/2025 dt.17.07.2025 issued by the 4*^ respondent in placing the petitioner^ F.P. Shop authorization

¶19

under suspension contrary to the control order 2018 though, the alleged variation within permissible limits is illegal, arbitrary and set aside the same direct the respondents to continue the petitioner as F.P Shop r in respect of F.P. shop No 1127008 of 11‘^ and 12*^ Ward Chennur iC^riage and Mandal, YSR Kadapa District. lA NO: 1 OF 2025 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 to suspend the operation of orders vide Ref.No.F/717/2025 dt. 17.07.2025 issued by the 4th respondent by continuing the petitioner as F.P. Shop dealership in respect of F.P. shop No. 1127008 of 11 &12 Ward, Chennur Village and Mandal, YSR Kadapa District, pending disposal of the writ petition.

¶20

Counsel for the Petitioner: SRI N. ASWARTHA NARAYANA Counsel for the Respondent Nos.1 to 5: GP FOR CIVIL SUPPLIES The Court made the following order:

¶21

APHC010392072025

¶22

IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT mARAVAJX (Special Original Jurisdiction)

¶23

[3458]

¶24

THURSDAY, THE SEVENTH DAY OF AUGUST TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE

¶25

PRESENT

¶26

THE HONOURABLE SMT JUSTICE KIRANMAYEE MANDAVA

¶27

WRIT PETITION NO: 20309/2025

¶28

Between;

¶29

1.SMT P SUBHASHINI, W/0 SREENIVASULU AGED 42 YEARS,^OCC F.P. SHOP DEALER, F.P. SHOP NO 1127008, IT AND 12TH^WARD OF CHENNURU, CHENNUR VILLAGE AND MANDAL, YSR KADAPA DISTRICT.

¶30

...PETITIONER

¶31

AND

¶32

1.THE STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH, REP. BY ITS PRINCIPAL SECRETARY, CONSUMER AFFAIRS, FOOD AND CIVIL SUPPLIES DEPARTMENT, SECRETARIAT, AMARAVATHI, GUNTUR DISTRICT.

¶33

2.THE DISTRICT COLLECTOR, YSR KADAPA DISTRICT.

¶34

3.THE JOINT COLLECTOR, YSR KADAPA DISTRICT.

¶35

4.THE SUB COLLECTOR CUM REVENUE DIVISIONAL OFFICER,^YSR KADAPA, YSR KADAPA DISTRICT.

¶36

5.THE TAHSILDAR, CHENNUR, YSR KADAPA DISTRICT..

¶37

...RESPONDENT(S):

¶38

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 tomay be pleased to issue a Writ of mandamus or any other appropriate writ order direction declaring the proceedings vide Ref.No.F/717/2025 dt. 17.07.2025 issued by the 4th respondent in placing the

¶39

2

¶40

petitioners F.P. Shop authorization under suspension contrary to the control order 2018 though, the alleged arbitrary and set aside the variation within permissible limits is illegal continue the petitioner as f p -®P°Fdents ,0 1127008 of 11th and 12th w °f F.P shop No District and to pass such ' "^'■9 Chennur Village and Mandal, YSR Ka^pa jA NO: 1 OF Petition under Section I^Sl ppp • in the affidavit filed in support of the k '^''''^'J'nstances^stated may be pleased to suspend .hl ope atn of dt. 17.07.2025 issued by the 4th resoonden k ' R®f^{No.F/717/2025} F.P. Shop deaiership in respect of F P /h m'' “"''"“"9^{'^epetitioneras} Chennur Village and Mandal, YSR Kadapa” Disfrict'^^^^H^ writ petition and to pass such ° disposal of the

¶41

Counsel for the Petitioner:

¶42

1. N ASWARTHA NARAYANA

¶43

Counsel for the RespondentfS)-

¶44

1GP FOR CIVIL SUPPLIES

¶45

3

¶46

THE HONOURABLE SMT JUSTICE KIRANMAYEE MANDAVA

¶47

WRIT PETITION NO: 20309 OF 2025

¶48

The Court made the following order:

¶49

Heard Sri S.Mahendra, learned counsel representing Sri N.Aswartha Narayana, learned counsel for the petitioners and learned Assistant Government pleader for Civil Supplies appearing for the respondents

¶50

The writ petition is filed assailing the proceedings^ofthe4 th respondent suspending the dealership of the fair price shop of the petitioner. 3. It is contended by the petitioner that the said proceedings were issued without issuing any notice to the petitioner and without conducting any enquiry. It is argued that on 04.07.2025 an enquiry was conducted and found certain variations in the stock as shown in the online and the ground balances. } 4. The following is the variation pointed out in the stock.

¶51

SI. No.	Name of the Commodit	Startin g Balan ce (in Kgs)	Relea sed stocks for July	Total stocks	Distri bute stock d s	Closing balance stocks at the time of inspectio n	At the time of Inspectio n remainin g stock	variations
1	PDS Rice (in Kgs)	0.95	13704	13704 .95	8501	5203.95	5100	(-)l 00.95
2	Sugar (Pkts)	29	880	909	586	323	324	(+)1 (Pkts)
3	Jowar	2615	50	2665	0	2665	2669	(+)4Kgs
4	Ragi	30.00	0	30	0	30	30	0.00

¶52

As noted.from the impugned proceedings, the authorization of the petitioner’s F.P. shop dealership has been suspended on the basis of the

¶53

4

¶54

alleged irregularities found during the inspection, without calling for any explanation of the petitioner.

¶55

Therefore, the impugned order is in violation of the principles of natural justice, the same is accordingly set aside and the^{matterisremandedbackto} the 4**^ respondent for passing appropriate orders, after giving due opportunity of hearing to the petitioner to submit his explanation to the alleged variations of the stock found by the authorities and pass appropriate orders in accordance with law.

¶56