Andhra Pradesh High Court
WP/13887/2026 of M. Anil Kumar, Vs The State of Andhra Pradesh, on 6 May 2026
IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH THURSDAY, THE SEVENTH DAY OF MAY TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY SIX THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE RAVI CHEEMALAPATI WRIT PETITION NO: 13887/2026 Between: 1. M. ANIL KUMAR,, S/O. LAKSMANNA, AGED ABOUT 34 YEARS, OCC. FAIR PRICE SHOP DEALER, R/O. H.NO. 4 VILLAGE,
APHC010263822026
IN TH
THURS
TWO
THE HONOURA
WR
Between:
1. M. ANIL KUMAR,,
OCC. FAIR PRICE
VILLAGE, C. BELA
1. THE STATE OF A
SECRETARY, CON
SECRETARIAT, VE
2. THE COLLECTOR C
3. THE REVENUE
DISTRICT-518002
4. THE TAHSILDHAR
518462
Petition under Articl
circumstances stated in
pleased topleased to is
particularly one in the na
orders of the 3rd respond
suspending the authoriz
E HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRAD
AT AMARAVATI
(Special Original Jurisdiction)
DAY,THE SEVENTH DAY OF MAY
O THOUSAND AND TWENTY SIX
PRESENT
ABLE SRI JUSTICE RAVI CHEEMAL
RIT PETITION NO: 13887/2026
S/O. LAKSMANNA, AGED ABOU
SHOP DEALER, R/O. H.NO. 4-154-
AGAL MANDAL, KURNOOL DISTRICT
AND
ANDHRA PRADESH, REP. BY IT
NSUMER AFFAIRS, FOOD AND CIV
ELAGAPUDI, GUNTUR DISTRICT-522
CS, KURNOOL DISTRICT, KURNOO
DIVISIONAL OFFICER, KURNOO
R, C. BELAGAL MANDAL, KURNO
...RES
le 226 of the Constitution of India pra
the affidavit filed therewith, the High
ssue an appropriate writ, order or
ature of Writ of Mandamus, declarin
dent vide Rc.DT(LR) 227/2026, dated
zation of the petitioner fair price Shop RC,J
DESH
LAPATI
UT 34 YEARS,
1, ERLADINNE
T
...PETITIONER
TS PRINCIPAL
VIL SUPPLIES,
OL-518002
OL, KURNOOL
OL DISTRICT-
SPONDENT(S):
aying that in the
h Court may be
direction more
g the impugned
d 20.04.2026, in
No. 1305026 of
RC,J
Erladinne Village, C. Belagal Mandal, Kurnool District basing on the 6-A
report issued by the 4th respondent, as illegal, arbitrary and in flagrant disregard to law and consequently set aside the aforesaid impugned orders of the 3rd respondent 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 direct the respondents to continue the petitioner as fair price shop dealer to Shop No. 1305026 of Erladinne Village, C. Belagal Mandal, Kurnool District by suspending the impugned orders of the 3rd respondent in Rc.DT(LR) 227/2026, dated 20.04.2026, pending disposal of the above writ petition and pass Counsel for the Petitioner:
1.K NAGA PHANINDRA
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 20.04.2026 passed by respondent no.3 vide Rc.DT(LR) 227/2026 suspending the petitioner’s authorization in respect of FP Shop No.1305026, Erladinne Village, C.Belagal Mandal, Kurnool District.
2. Heard Sri K.Naga Phanindra, learned counsel for the petitioner, and Sri Appasani Vineeth, learned Assistant Government Pleader for Civil Supplies.
3. Sri K. Naga Phanindra, learned counsel, while reiterating the contents of the writ affidavit would contend that the authorities, alleging variations in RC,J
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 7th May, 2026.
RR