Andhra Pradesh High Court
WP/10283/2026 of P. Venkateswarlu, Vs The State of Andhra Pradesh, on 20 April 2026
HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) [3332] TUESDAY, THE TWENTY FIRST DAY OF APRIL TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY SIX PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE RAVI CHEEMALAPATI WRIT PETITION NO: 10283/2026 Between: 1. P. VENKATESWARLU,, S/O. VENKAIAH , AGED ABOUT 36 YEARS,
APHC010173962026
IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH
AT AMARAVATI
(Special Original Jurisdiction)
TUESDAY,THE TWENTY FIRST DAY OF APRIL
TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY SIX
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE RAVI CHEEMALAPATI
WRIT PETITION NO: 10283/2026
Between:
1. P. VENKATESWARLU,, S/O. VENKAIAH , AGED ABOUT 36
YEARS, OCC DEALER , F.P.SHOP NO. 0929029, R/O.
PYNAPURAM VILLAGE , MUTHUKUR MANDAL, SPSR
NELLORE DISTIICT-524344.
...PETITIONER
AND
1. THE STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH, REP BY ITS PRINCIPAL
SECRETARY
TO
GOVERNMENT,
CIVIL
SUPPLIES
DEPARTMENT, SECRETARIAT BUILDINGS, AMARAVATI, GUNTUR DISTRICT-522238.
2. THE COLLECTOR CIVIL SUPPLIES, SPSR NELLORE DISTRICT, ATNELLORE-524001.
3. THE REVENUE DIVISIONAL OFFICER, NELLORE REVENUE
DIVISION, NELLORE, SPSR NELLORE DISTRICT-524001.
4. THE TAHSILDAR, MUTHUKUR MANDAL, MUTHUKUR, SPSR
NELLORE DISTRICT-524344
...RESPONDENT(S):
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 appropriate Writ Order or direction more
particularly one in the nature of writ of Mandamus or any other appropriate writ declaring the proceedings of the Respondent No.3
issued vide proceeding in Rc.H. 374-/2025 dated 13.3.2026, suspending the authorisation in respect of FP Shop No. 0929029, Pynapuram Village, Muthukur Mandal, SPSR Nellore District as illegal and contrary to A.P.State Targeted Public Distribution System (Control) order 2018
apart from violation of Principles of Natural Justice consequentially set aside the proceedings of the Respondent No 3 Rc.H. 374/2025 dated 13.3.2026 and further direct the Respondents continue the petitioner as F P Shop Dealer and pass such 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 to direct the Respondents to allot the stocks for distribution to the card holders by suspending the order issued by the Respondent No 3 in Rc.H. 374/2025 dated 13.3.2026 in respect of FP Shop No 0929029, Pynapuram Village, Muthukur Mandal, SPSR Nellore District and pass such Counsel for the Petitioner:
1. B SESIBUSHAN RAO
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:
Questioning the proceedings dated 13.03.2026 issued by the 3rd respondent vide Rc.H.374/2025 suspending the petitioner’s authorization in respect of Fair Price Shop No.0929029, Pynapuram Village, Muthukur Mandal, S.P.S.R. Nellore District, the present writ petition is filed.
2. Heard Sri B.Sesi Bushan Rao, learned counsel for the petitioner and Sri Appasani Vineeth, learned Assistant Government Pleader for Civil Supplies.
3. Learned counsel for the petitioner while reiterating the contents of the writ affidavit would contend that the authorities, basing on 6A report filed by the 4th respondent against the petitioner, issued show cause notice, for which the petitioner submitted explanation. Thereafter, the 6A case has been disposed of with a finding that there are variations found in the ground balance of the essential commodities in the fair price shop and the authorities, in a mechanical way, suspended the authorization of the petitioner, 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 ground balance of commodities, suspended the Fair Price 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 Fair Price shop dealership authorization was suspended pending enquiry. It is fairly conceded by the learned Assistant Government Pleader that enquiry had not been completed so far.
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 (03) 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, without going into the merits of the matter, this Court is inclined to dispose of the writ petition without inviting counter, by passing the following order:
“The authorities are directed to conclude the enquiry within a period of three (03) months from the date of receipt of a copy of this order else the order of suspension shall be revoked.”
9. Accordingly, the Writ Petition is disposed of. There shall be no order as to costs.
As a sequel, miscellaneous applications, pending if any, shall stand closed. _____________________________
JUSTICE RAVI CHEEMALAPATI
Date: 21st April, 2026
RKS