Kotari Nageswararao Vs the State of Andhra Pradesh

KOTARI NAGESWARARAO, S/O. KOTARI SATYARAO, AGE 35 YEARS OCC FAIR PRICE SHOP DEALER R/O. H.NO. 1-77/2, YARRAVARAM 25, YALAMANCHILIMANDALAM, YERRAVARAM, VISAKHAPATNAM-531055.

¶11

...PETITIONER

¶12

AND

¶13

THE STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH, REP. BY ITS PRINCIPAL SECRETARY CIVIL SUPPLIES DEPARTMENT A.P. SECRETARIAL, VELAYAPUDI, AMARAVATHI-522238.

¶14

THE DISTRICT COLLECTOR, ANAKAPALLI DISTRICT, VISAKHAPATNAM.531001

¶15

THE REVENUE DIVISIONAL OFFICER, ANAKAPALLI DIVISION, VISAKHAPATNAM.531001

¶16

THE DISTRICT CIVIL SUPPLIES OFFICER, ANAKAPALLI DISTRICT, ANAKAPALLI-530022.

¶17

THE DISTRICT VIGILANCE OFFICER, ANAKAPALLI DISTRICT.531001

¶18

Page 2 of 6

¶19

THE TAHSILDAR, YELAMANCHILI MANDAL, ANAKAPALLI DISTRICT.531055

¶20

G ANURADHA, W/O NOT KNOWN TO THE PETITIONER, FAIR PRICE SHOP DEALER, SHOP NO. 0341002, YALAMANCHILI MANDAL, ANAKAPALLI DISTRICT-531055.

¶21

...RESPONDENT(S):

¶22

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 topleased to issue a writ or direction more particularly one in the nature Writ of Mandamus declaring the action of the respondents in unilaterally appointing Unofficial Respondent No. / as an in-charge dealer and preventing the petitioner from operating his Fair Price Shop No.0341006, Yalamanchili- 6 of Yelamanchili Mandal, Anakapalli District, without the issuance of any formal suspension or cancellation order, and without following the due process of law, as illegal, arbitrary, and violative of the principles of natural justice and Articles 14 and 19(1)(g) of the Constitution of India and also violative of Andhra Pradesh State Targeted Public Distribution System (Control) Order 2018 and consequently direct the respondents to immediately restore the petitioner's dealership, permit him to resume his duties as the Fair Price Shop dealer for Fair Price Shop No.0341006, Yaiamanchili-6 of Yelamanchili Mandal, Anakapalli District, and continue the distribution of essential commodities to the attached cardholders 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 direct the respondents to allow the petitioner to function as the F.P. shop dealer and to supply essential commodities to his shop for Shop No.0341006 in Yeiamanchili, Anakapalli District, pending disposal of the writ petition and to pass

¶25

Page 3 of 6

¶26

Counsel for the Petitioner:

¶27

1.SHAIK SHAHEDAZ

¶28

Counsel for the Respondent(S):

¶29

1.GP FOR CIVIL SUPPLIES

¶30

The Court made the following order:

¶31

Heard Ms. Shaik Shahedaz, learned counsel for the petitioner and Sri Vineeth Appasani, learned Assistant Government Pleader for Civil Supplies, for respondents 1 to 6.

¶32

The notice in respect of respondent No.7 is dispensed with since no adverse order affecting her rights or interests is passed.

¶33

The petitioner was appointed as a Fair Price Shop Dealer in respect of F.P.Shop No.0341006, Yalamnchili-6, Yelamanchili Mandal, Anakapalli District, vide proceedings Rc.No.1113/2024/SA-E, dated 29.12.2024 issued by respondent No.3. While the matter stood thus, the Deputy Tahsildar (Civil supplies), Yelamanchili Mandal, along with the Vigilance and Enforcement Authorities inspected F.P. shop No.0341006 and prepared mediators’ report, Ex.P3. No disciplinary proceedings under clause 8(4) of the Andhra Pradesh Targeted Public Distribution System (Control) Order, 2018 (for short ‘the Control Order, 2018’) were initiated. Neither was the authorisation suspended nor was a show cause notice issued. Respondent No.7, a neighbouring FP Shop dealer, was appointed as the in-charge dealer for the supply of commodities. Aggrieved by the action of the respondents in appointing respondent No.7 as in-charge dealer and preventing the petitioner from

¶34

Page 4 of 6

¶35

operating his F.P. shop and distributing the commodities, the above writ petition is filed.

¶36

The learned counsel for the petitioner would submit that no disciplinary action was initiated against the petitioner. However, respondents 3 and 6 are not supplying essential commodities to the petitioner, enabling him to distribute the same to the cardholders.

¶37

The learned Assistant Government Pleader, on instructions,submitted that respondent No.3 has not initiated any disciplinary action against the petitioner. He further submitted that after the inspection on 06.07.2026, respondent No.7, the neighbouring Fair Price Shop dealer, was asked to distribute the commodities attached to F.P. Shop No.03410006, Yalamnchili-6, Yelamanchili Mandal, Anakapalli District.

¶38

Admittedly, no disciplinary proceedings are initiated against the petitioner as per the Control Order 2018. Therefore, preventing the petitioner from distributing the essential commodities and appointing respondent No.7 as in-charge dealer, without initiating disciplinary proceedings against the petitioner under Clause 8 (4) of the Control Order, 2018; is impermissible.

¶39

Given the above facts and circumstances of the case, keeping the writ petition pending and inviting a counter will not serve any purpose. Hence, this writ petition is disposed of at the admission stage with the consent of learned counsel on either side, directing respondents 3 and 6 to supply stock to the petitioner and allow him to distribute the commodities to the cardholders in relation to FP shop No.0341006, Yalamnchili-6, Yelamanchili Mandal, Anakapalli District immediately. However, this order will not preclude

¶40

Page 5 of 6

¶41

the authorities from conducting an enquiry, if any, in accordance with the Control Order, 2018. No costs.

¶42

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

¶43

___________________________ JUSTICE SUBBA REDDY SATTI Date: 14.07.2026 IKN

¶44

Whether the order is : Speaking Yes/No / Recorded Yes/No Reportable Yes/No / Non-Reportable Yes/No

¶45

Page 6 of 6