Andhra Pradesh High Court
WP/8651/2026 of SYED PHAGALOON Vs THE STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH on 1 April 2026
HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) [3332] THURSDAY, THE SECOND DAY OF APRIL TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY SIX PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE RAVI CHEEMALAPATI WRIT PETITION NO: 8651/2026 Between: 1. SYED PHAGALOON, D/O. MEERAVALI, AGED ABOUT 40 YEARS, OCC F.P.
APHC010167242026
IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH
AT AMARAVATI
(Special Original Jurisdiction)
THURSDAY,THE SECOND DAY OF APRIL
TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY SIX
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE RAVI CHEEMALAPATI
WRIT PETITION NO: 8651/2026
Between:
1. SYED PHAGALOON, D/O. MEERAVALI, AGED ABOUT 40
YEARS, OCC F.P. SHOP DEALER, SHOP NO. 0804010, R/O.
KURECHEDU VILLAGE AND MANDAL, PRAKASAM DISTRICT.
...PETITIONER
AND
1. THE STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH, REP., BY ITS PRINCIPAL
SECRETARY, CIVIL SUPPLIES DEPARTMENT, VELAGAPUDI
SECRETARIAT BUILDING, AMARAVATHI, GUNTUR DISTRICT, ANDHRA PRADESH.
2. THE REVENUE DIVISIONAL OFFICER, ADDANKI REVENUE
DIVISION, PRAKASAM DISTRICT.
3. THE
TAHSILDAR,
KURECHEDU
MANDAL,
PRAKASAM
DISTRICT.
...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 writ or order more particularly one in the nature of writ of mandamus or an appropriate writ or order declaring the proceedings in Rc. B./37/2026, dated 05.02.2026 passed by the 2nd respondent by suspending the authorization of the petitioner in respect of the F.P. Shop No. 0804010, Kurechedu Village, Kurechedu Mandal,
Prakasam District, is illegal, arbitrary and unconstitutional and against to the principles of natural justice and contrary to the Control Orders and consequently set aside the same and to 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 to suspend the proceedings in Rc. B./37/2026, dated 05.02.2026 passed by the 2nd respondent by suspending the authorization of the petitioner in respect of the F.P. Shop No. 0804010, Kurechedu Village, Kurechedu Mandal, Prakasam District, pending disposal of the writ petition and pass Counsel for the Petitioner:
1. KOTI REDDY IDAMAKANTI
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 05.02.2026 issued by the 2nd respondent vide Rc.B./37/2026 suspending the petitioner’s authorization in respect of Fair Price Shop No.0804010, Kurechedu Village and Mandal, Prakasam District, the present writ petition is filed.
2. Heard Sri I.Koti Reddy, 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, alleging variations in the ground balance of commodities found during inspection of the Fair Price shop, issued show cause notice, for which the petitioner submitted 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 ground balance of commodities, suspended 1 2020(6) ALD 209
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 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: 02nd April, 2026
RKS