Golivi Kondala Rao Vs The State of Andhra Pradesh

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 or Order or Direction more particularly one in the nature of a Writ of Writ of Mandamus declaring the action of the 2nd Respondent passed an impugned Interim Suspension Order RC NO./2026 CS dt.18-04-2026 of Petitioners Fair Price Shop Authorization No.0120048 Jonnalapadu Village, Gara Mandal Srikakulam not even issued any Show Cause Notice nor given any opportunity to the petitioner before ordering

¶21

Page 2 of 5

¶22

Interim Suspension it is done by the 2nd Respondent with an ulterior motive behind the impugned order , without following the due process of law, Violation of Principles of Natural Justice , Violation of Article 14,19 of the Constitution of India, Violation of Rulings of this Hon'ble Court Consequently to Set-Aside the impugned Interim Suspension Order RC NO. /2026 CS dt.18-04-2026 of Petitioners Fair Price Shop No.0120048 Jonnalapadu Village, Gara Mandal Srikakulam Jonnalapadu Village, Gara Mandal by Allowing the Writ Petition and to pass

¶23

IA NO: 1 OF 2026

¶24

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 impugned Interim Suspension Order RC NO. /2026 CS dt.1804-2026 of Petitioner’s Fair Price Shop No.0120048 Jonnalapadu Village, Gara Mandal Srikakulam pending disposal of the main Writ Petition in the interest of the justice, pending disposal of the above writ petition and pass

¶25

Counsel for the Petitioner:

¶26

1.R SIVA SAI SWARUP

¶27

Counsel for the Respondent(S):

¶28

1.GP FOR CIVIL SUPPLIES

¶29

The Court made the following order:

¶30

Heard Sri R.Sampath, learned counsel representing Sri R.Siva Sai Swarup, learned counsel for the petitioner and Sri Vineeth Appasani, learned Assistant Government Pleader for Civil Supplies, for the respondents.

¶31

The petitioner was appointed as a Fair Price Shop Dealer in respect of F.P. Shop No.0120028 of Ambativanipeta, Gara Mandal, Srikakulam District. The Tahsildar, Gara Mandal, inspected the shop on 01.04.2026 and found some variations. The Tahsildar, in turn, submitted a report to the 2^nd respondent. Thereafter, the 2^nd respondent vide proceedings Rc.No…/2026 CS dated 18.04.2026 (Ex.P1), suspended the authorisation of the petitioner pending inquiry in terms of Clause-8(4) of the A.P.S.T.P.D.S (Control) Order, 2018.

¶32

Page 3 of 5

¶33

Learned counsel for the petitioner would submit that Ex.P1 suffers from a violation of the Principles of Natural Justice. He would further submit that, as per Clause-8(4) of the Control Order, the inquiry shall be concluded within ninety days. However, to date, no notice has been issued to the petitioner. Neither the inspection report nor the relevant documents were furnished to the petitioner.

¶34

Learned Assistant Government Pleader for Civil Supplies would submit that, pursuant to Ex.P1, the 2^nd respondent appointed a temporary dealer for the smooth distribution of the commodities.

¶35

Clause-8(4)(2) of the Control Order mandates that the disciplinary proceedings initiated against a Fair Price Shop Dealer shall be concluded as expeditiously as possible, preferably within three months from the date of initiation of the proceedings, keeping in view the convenience of the cardholders and the smooth functioning of the Targeted Public Distribution System. Clause-8(5) enables the authority to appoint a temporary dealer for a period of three months or till the vacancy is filled up permanently, whichever is earlier.

¶36

Thus, a conjoint reading of Clause-8(4) and 8(5), enjoins that the authority to conclude the disciplinary proceedings within three months. In the case at hand, pursuant to Ex.P1 dated 18.04.2026, the inquiry should have been completed on or before 18.07.2026.

¶37

At this juncture, the learned Assistant Government Pleader for Civil Supplies would submit that four more weeks may be provided to the authority to conclude the inquiry.

¶38

Given the facts and circumstances of the case, without going into the merits of the matter, the writ petition is disposed of, at the stage of admission, with the consent of all the learned counsel, directing the 2^nd respondent to conclude the inquiry pursuant to Ex.P1 dated 18.04.2026 after furnishing the copies of all the relevant documents to the petitioner. The 2^nd respondent shall

¶39

Page 4 of 5

¶40

pass a reasoned order by following the circular instructions vide CCS.Ref.No.PDS.II(1)/307/2025 dated 05.12.2025, as amended from time to time, and the order in W.A.No.122 of 2025. The petitioner shall cooperate during the inquiry. If the 2^nd respondent fails to conclude the inquiry within the stipulated time, as referred supra , the proceedings Ex.P1 dated 18.04.2026 shall stand revoked automatically without any further reference to this Court. In such an event, the authorisation of the petitioner shall be restored. There shall be no order as to costs.

¶41

As a sequel, pending miscellaneous petitions, if any, shall stand closed.

¶42

___________________________ JUSTICE SUBBA REDDY SATTI

¶43

Date: 07.07.2026 SNI

¶44

Whether the order is:

¶45

Speaking Yes/No / Reasoned Yes/No Reportable Yes/No / Non-Reportable Yes/No

¶46

Page 5 of 5