Andhra Pradesh High Court
WP/14240/2026 of T YELLAIAH Vs THE STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH on 7 May 2026
IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH FRIDAY, THE EIGHTH DAY OF MAY TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY SIX THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE RAVI CHEEMALAPATI WRIT PETITION NO: 14240/2026 Between: 1. T YELLAIAH, S/O. T. KASHANNA, AGED ABOUT 34 YEARS, OCC FAIR SHOP DEALER, F.P. SHOP NO. 1334044, R/O.46,
APHC010273352026
IN TH
FRID
TWO
THE HONOURA
WR
Between:
1. T YELLAIAH, S/O.
FAIR SHOP DEALE
VILLAGE, NAN
DISTRICT. 518501
1. THE STATE OF A
SECRETARY, C
DEPARTMENT
S
AMARAVATI, GUNT
2. THE SUB COLLECT
3. THE
REVENUE
KURNOOL NOW NA
4. THE TAHSILDAR,
DISTRICT. 518501
Petition under Articl
circumstances stated in
pleased topleased to issu
Order or direction declari
E HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRAD
AT AMARAVATI
(Special Original Jurisdiction)
DAY,THE EIGHTH DAY OF MAY
O THOUSAND AND TWENTY SIX
PRESENT
ABLE SRI JUSTICE RAVI CHEEMAL
RIT PETITION NO: 14240/2026
T. KASHANNA, AGED ABOUT 34
ER, F.P. SHOP NO. 1334044, R/O.4
DYAL MANDAL, KURNOOL NO
AND
ANDHRA PRADESH, REP. BY IT
CONSUMER AFFAIRS AND CIV
SECRETARIAT
BUILDINGS
TUR DISTRICT. 522237
TOR, NANDHYAL DISTRICT. 518501
DIVISIONAL
OFFICER,
NANDYA
ANDYAL DISTRICT. 518501
NANDYAL MANDAL, KURNOOL NO
...RES
le 226 of the Constitution of India pra
the affidavit filed therewith, the High
ue a Writ of Mandamus or any other
ing the action of the 3rd responden
RC,J
DESH
LAPATI
YEARS, OCC
46, AYYALURU
OW NANDYAL
...PETITIONER
TS PRINCIPAL
VIL SUPPLIES
VELAGAPUDI,
AL
DIVISION,
OW NANDYAL
SPONDENT(S):
aying that in the
h Court may be
appropriate Writ
nt in suspending
RC,J
the authorization the petitioner Fair price shop No. 1334044 of Ayyaluru Village, Nandhyal Mandal, Nandhyal District (Kurnool) vide proceedings dated. 10.04.2026 in Rc.B3/CS/786/2026 without conducting enquiry is illegal, arbitrary and violation of principles of natural justice. Consequently, set aside the same and pass IA NO: 1 OF 2026
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 suspend the proceedings issued by the 3rd respondent in suspending the authorization the petitioner Fair price shop No. 1334044 of Ayyaluru Village, Nandhyal Mandal, Nandhyal District (Kurnool) vide proceedings dated. 10.04.2026 in RC.B3/CS/786/2026 by continuing the petitioner as a Fair price shop dealer in Fair price shop No. 1334044 of Ayyaluru Village, Nandhyal Mandal, Nandhyal District (Kurnool) pending disposal of the above Writ Petition and pass Counsel for the Petitioner:
1.K SRINIVAS
Counsel for the Respondent(S):
1.GP FOR CIVIL SUPPLIES
The Court made the following:
Citations and Judicial Treatment
Cited by
0
Decisions in the index citing it
Cites
0
Decisions referred to
In this index
0
Of the decisions it cites
Overruled / Questioned
0
No negative treatment found
Loading the citing and cited decisions…
This judgment in the centre: on the left the decisions it cites, on the right the decisions citing it. Colour is the treatment; choose a decision to open it.
ORDER
This writ petition is filed questioning the orders dated 10.04.2026 passed by respondent no.3 vide proceedings Rc.B3/CS/786/2026 suspending the petitioner’s authorization in respect of FP Shop No.1334044, Ayyaluru Village, Nandhyal Mandal, Nandhyal District.
2. Heard Sri K. Srinivas, learned counsel for the petitioner, and Sri Appasani Vineeth, learned Assistant Government Pleader for Civil Supplies.
RC,J
3. Sri K.Srinivas, learned counsel, while reiterating the contents of the writ affidavit would contend that the authorities, alleging variations in the ground stock found during inspection of the FP shop, issued show cause notice calling for explanation, for which the petitioner submitted a detailed explanation, however, the authorities, without considering the explanation, in a mechanical way, suspended the authorization of the petitioner without giving reasons in violation of the orders passed by this Court in K.Prabhavathi vs. State of A.P. 1, therefore, the impugned suspension order is liable to be set aside. Accordingly, prayed to allow the writ petition.
4. Sri Appasani Vineeth, learned Assistant Government Pleader, justified the impugned order of suspension contending that as the authorities found variation in between ground stocks and book, suspended the F.P.shop authorization of the petitioner, pending final enquiry, after following the procedure contemplated under law. He would further contend that the writ petition being meritless deserves dismissal. Accordingly, prayed to dismiss the writ petition.
5. Perused the material available on record and considered the submissions made by learned counsel for the parties.
6. The petitioner’s FP shop dealership authorization was suspended pending enquiry.
1. 2020(6) ALD 209
RC,J
7. Clause 8(4)(2) of the Andhra Pradesh Targeted Public Distribution System (Control) Order, 2018 mandates that the appointing authority shall dispose the disciplinary case filed against the fair price shop dealers as early as possible, preferably within a period of three (3) months from the date of filing, keeping in view of the convenience of the cardholders and for smooth functioning of Targeted Public Distribution System.
8. In view of the above, if the authorities fails to conclude the enquiry within three (03) months as stipulated under Clause 8(4)(2) of Control Order, 2018, the suspension orders passed by respondent no.3 vide Rc.DT(LR) 227/2026, dated 20.04.2026, shall stand revoked.
10. Accordingly, the writ petition is disposed of. There shall be no order as to costs.
Pending miscellaneous petitions, if any, shall stand closed. ___________________________ JUSTICE RAVI CHEEMALAPATI 8th May, 2026.
RR