Disposed

M/s. M. M. Foods Processing Para boiled Rice Mill, v. The State of Telangana

Telangana HC18 Dec 2025WP/39007/2025

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

A rice mill blacklisted for one year for failing to supply CMR rice within the permitted period challenged the order as arbitrary. The court set aside the blacklisting since no show cause notice preceded it, noting authorities had extended supply time, and directed reconsideration of the mill's representation.

What did the court decide?

Impugned blacklisting order dt.17-11-2025 set aside; respondent No.2 directed to consider petitioner's representation dt.06-12-2025 per Circular dt.24-11-2025 and G.O.Ms.No.17; no costs.

M/s. M. M. Foods Processing Para boiled… — Public Procurement and Tenders | Telangana HC (2025)

¶1

[³²¹⁹ I

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction)

¶3

THURSDAY, THE EIGHTEENTH DAY OF DECEMBER TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE

¶4

PRESENT

¶5

THE HONOURABLE SMT JUSTICE T.MADHAVI DEVI

¶6

WRIT PETITION NO: 39007 OF 2025

¶7

Between:

¶8

Mis. M. M. Foods Processing Para boiled Rice Mill, lrkode Village, Siddipet Rural Mandal, Siddipet District, represented by its Proprietor, M. Mallesh S/o. Sundaraiah, Age. 55 Years.

¶9

..PETITIONER

¶10

AND

¶11

1 The State of Telangana, represented by its Principal Secretary, Consumer Affairs, Food and Civil Supplies Department, Secretariat Buildings, Hyderabad.

¶12

2 The Collector (CS), Siddipet District, Siddipet.

¶13

J The District Civil Supplies Officer, Siddipet District, Siddipet.

¶14

4 The District Manager, Telangana State Civil Supplies Corporation, Siddipet District, Siddipet.

¶15

5 The Commissioner, Civil Supplies Department, Civil Supplies Bhavan, Somajiguda, Hyderabad.

¶16

...RESPONDENTS

¶17

Petition under Article 226 of lhe Constitution of lndia^praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed therewith, the High Court^may be pleased to issue an order or direction more particularly one in the nature of writ of mandamus or any other appropriate writ declaring the orders^passed by the respondent No. 2 in C51118312025, dated 17-11-2025, without issuing any notice and without giving any opportunity of hearing to the^petitioner and^without considering the explanation submitted by the^petitioner, even though the^petitioner is showing his readiness to deliver the entire balance rice as^per the circular dated 24-11-2025 and not passing any orders considering the representation dated 0612-2025, is nothing but arbitrary, illegal, null and^void and violative of^{principles of}

¶18

I I I II I I I I iI I N I I I ! I I I I t I I I t I { i : ,i !

¶19

natural^justice and also violative of Articles^{14, 19 and 2'1 )f the constitutionof} lndia. Consequently set aside the orders^{passed by theres rlondent No. 2 stated} above, thereby direct the respondent authorities^{to considerthe representationof} the petitioner dated 06-12-2025^permitting the^{petitioner to (l,rliver the balance rice} to be delivered and allot the CMR^{paddy to the petition: ' rice mill for Khariff} Marketing Season 2025-26, by removing from blacklist.

¶20

lA NO: 1 OF 2025

¶21

Petition under Section 151 CPC^praying that^{in the cir lumstances statedin} the affidavit filed in support of the^{petition, the HighCor- rmay be pleased to} suspend the orders^passed by the respondent^{No. 2 in CS't18312025, daled17'} 11-2025, thereby^permit the^petitioner to mill the^{entire stocl, of paddyand deliver} the stock of rice to be delivered.

¶22

Counsel for the Petitioner: SRI K. VENUMADHAV

¶23

Counsel for the Respondent Nos.1 to 3 and 5: GP^{FORCl/ L SUPPLIES}

¶24

Counsel for the Respondent No.4: SRI K. DEVENDER, SC^{t OR TGCSC} The Court made the following: ORDER

¶25

: : I i iI iI II I i I i : I l

¶26

..t ,r.<r".*f

¶27

¶28

IN THE HIGH COURT^FOR THE^{STATEOF TELANGANA}

¶29

AT HYDERABAI)

¶30

THE HON'BLE SMT. JUSTICE T. MADHAVT^DEVI WRIT PETITION No.39OO7 OF 2025

¶31

DATE: L8.L2.2O25

¶32

Between:

¶33

M/s.M.M.Foods Processing Para boiled^{Rice Mili}

¶34

...Petitioner

¶35

AND

¶36

The State of Telangana & 4 others

¶37

...Respondents

¶38

ORDER:

¶39

In this writ petition, the^{petitioner ischallenging} proceedings of respondent No.2 dt.^{17.11.2025under which the} petitioner has been black listed in participating in^{any paddy} procurement of CMR paddy for a^period of^{one year i.e., for two} seasons, as illegal and arbitrary.

¶40

It is submitted that show cause notice^{was issuedonly to} explain the shortfall in supply of^CMR rice^{and the petitioner} has also submitted his explanation ald^{withoutissuingany} further show cause notice for black listing, the^respondents hiVB passed the impugned order. It is^{submittedthat}

¶41

¶42

¶43

thereafter, the Government has extended the tirr e for supply of CMR rice tfl 2a.02.2O26 for KMS 2024 2O2: vicle Circular dt.24.11.2025

¶44

The petitioner claims to have made a representation dt.06.12.2025 to re consider his case for supplr cl CMR rice in view of the Circular dt.24.11 .2025.

¶45

Learnecl Government Pleader for Civil Sr.1 ,plies ald the learned Standing counsel lor Civil Supplies O rrporation are also heard.

¶46

Having rcga-rd to the fact that no shorv ca, se !.as issued prior to passing of the impugned order, blil k listing the petitioner's rir:c. rnill. the order of black listing is I .ble to be set aside. Further, black listing appears to be onlr, ,n the ground that petitioner has not supplied CMR rice wit I in t.i-re period allowed by the authorities. Now, the authoriti ,s themselves have extended the period for supply of CMR rice f rr KMS 2024_ 25 upto 2A.O2.2026. Therefore, the imyr rgned order dt. 17.1I.2O25 is set aside and the respondent Nt .2 is directed consider the representation of the petitioner dt.( 6. 12.2025 in

¶47

terms of Circular dt.24.11.2025 and also G.O.Ms.No.17

¶48

dt.04.I o.2025.

¶49

Accordingly, the Writ Petition is disposed of. There shall be no order as to costs. Miscellaneous petitions, if any,

¶50

pending in this Writ Petition, shall stand closed.

¶51

SD/. T.SRINIVASA REDDY A SISTANT REGISTRAR

//TRUE COPY//

SECTION OFFICER

To,

The State of Telangana,^{representedby its Pnncipal} le9ptgry'^Consumer Affairs, Food and Civil Supities^{Department, SecretariatBuildings,} Hyderabad.

¶57

The Collector^(CS), Siddipet^{District,Siddipet.}

¶58

The District Civil Supplies^{Officer, Siddipet District, Siddipet'}

¶59

The District Manager, Telangana^{State Civil Supplies Corporation, Siddipet} District, Siddipet.

¶60

The Commissioner, Civil^{Supplies Department, Civil SuppliesBhavan,} Somajiguda, Hyderabad.

¶61

One CC to Sri^{K. Venumadhav,Advocate} [OPUC]

¶62

Two CCs to^{GP for} Civil^{Supplies, High Court for the State of Telangana, at} Hyderabad [OUT]

¶63

One CC to Sri K.^{Devender,SC for TGCSCIOPUCI}

¶64

Two CD Copies

TJ PSK

HIGH COURT

CC TODAY

DATED:1811212025

ORDER

+
1 :1 S
(
()
O t:
1.r t
*
Cr.,.

¶71

WP.No.39007 ot 2025

¶72

DISPOSING OF THE WRIT PETITION WITHOUT COSTS

M/s. M. M. Foods Processing Para boiled Rice Mill, v. The State of Telangana

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

M/s. M. M. Foods Processing Para boiled Rice Mill, v. The State of Telangana

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

G. Srivani Vs The State of Telangana

Smt. Pindi Bhagyamma Vs The State Telangana

Peddamamidi Janaiah Vs The State of Telangana

Primary Fishermen Cooperative Society Vs The State of Telangana

Palugula Uma Rani Vs The State Of Telangana

M.A. Rasheed Vs .Sri. C.V. Anand, I.P.S