Andhra Pradesh High Court – Amravati
M Rami Reddy vs The State Of Andhra Pradesh on 29 April, 2026
APHC010218192026
IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH
AT AMARAVATI [3332]
(Special Original Jurisdiction)
WEDNESDAY, THE TWENTY NINETH DAY OF APRIL
TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY SIX
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE RAVI CHEEMALAPATI
WRIT PETITION NO: 11720/2026
Between:
1. M RAMI REDDY, S/O. M. SIVA REDDY, AGED ABOUT 56 YEARS.
FAIR PRICE SHOP DEALER NO. 1241045, R/O. BISINIVARIPALLI
VILLAGE, TANAKAL MANDAL, SRI SATYA SAI DISTRICT
DISTRICT-515571
...PETITIONER
AND
1. THE STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH, REP. BY ITS PRINCIPAL
SECRETARY, CONSUMER AFFAIRS, FOOD AND CIVIL SUPPLIES
DEPARTMENT, SECRETARIAT BUILDINGS, VELAGAPUDI,
AMARAVATI.-522237
522237
2. THE REVENUE DIVISIONAL OFFICER, KADIRI DIVISION, SRI SATYA
SAI DISTRICT.-515134
515134
3. THE TAHSILDAR, TANAKAL MANDAL, S
SRI
RI SATYA SAI DISTRICT.-
DISTRICT.
515571
...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 topleased to issue a Writ of Mandamus or an anyy other appropriate Writ
Order or direction declaring the action of the respondent no. 2 and 3 in not
supplying the essential commodities to the petitioner fair price shop no.
1241045, operating at Bisinivaripalli Village, Tanakal Mandal, Sri Satya Sai
District
istrict Without there being any suspension or cancellation of the petitioners
is illegal, arbitrary and violation of Articles 14, 19 and 21 of constitution of
2
India consequently direct the respondents no. 2 and 3 to supply essential
commodities to the petitioner for fair price shop no. 1241045, operating at
Bisinivaripalli Village, Tanakal Mandal, Sri Satya Sai District. 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 direct the respondents no. 2 and 3 to supply essential commodities to
the petitioner for fair price shop no. 1241045, operating at Bisinivaripalli
Village, Tanakal Mandal, Sri Satya Sai District. By enabling him to supply to
the card holders 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
3The Court made the following order:
Aggrieved by the action of respondent Nos.2 and 3 in not supplying the
essential commodities to the petitioner’s Fair Price shop No.1241045 at
Basinivaripalli Village, Tanakal Mandal, Sri Satya Sai District without any order
of suspension or cancellation of the petitioner’s authorization, the present Writ
Petition is filed.
2. Heard Ms M.Priya, learned counsel, representing Sri K.Srinivas, learned
counsel for the petitioner and Sri Appasani Vineeth, learned Assistant
Government Pleader for Civil Supplies appearing for the respondents.
3. Learned counsel for the petitioner, while reiterating the contents of the
writ affidavit contended that the petitioner was appointed as Fair Price shop
dealer for the subject shop. She further contended that on 02.04.2026, the
inspecting officials conducted an inspection of the petitioner’s Fair Price shop
in the presence of panchayatdars and during the inspection, they found an
alleged excess of 258 kgs of fortified rice, shortage of 24 kgs of Raagi and an
excess of 17.5 kgs of sugar when compared with the recorded balance. She
further submitted that respondent No.2 issued a show cause notice to the
petitioner dated 10.04.2026, to which the petitioner submitted his explanation
on 18.04.2026. She further submitted that without conducting any enquiry
pursuant to the issuance of the show cause notice and without passing any
order of suspension or cancellation, the respondent authorities have withheld
4
the supply of essential commodities meant for distribution. Hence, prayed to
allow the writ petition.
4. On the other hand, Sri Vineeth Appasani, learned Assistant
Government Pleader, placed on record the written instructions of the Revenue
Divisional officer, Kadiri dated 28.04.2026 and submitted that based on the
Inspection report, a case under the Essential Commodities Act, 1955 was filed
against the petitioner before the Joint Collector, Sri Sathya Sai District on
04.04.2026 and a show cause notice was issued to the petitioner on
10.04.2024 alleging stock variations. He further submitted that the distribution
of stock for the month of April 2026 was entrusted to the Village Revenue as a
temporary administrative measure to safeguard public interest while the
inquiry is pending. He further submitted that the petitioner, being a temporary
Fair Price shop dealer, has no vested right to claim continuation of stock
supply, particularly when serious irregularities have been detected and
disciplinary proceedings are in progress, hence, the action of the revenue
authorities is lawful and 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. As rightly contended by the learned counsel for the petitioner, there is
neither suspension nor cancellation of the FP shop authorization of the
petitioner. Therefore, stoppage of supply of essential commodities for being
5
distributed to the cardholders allocated to the FP shop of the petitioner is
unsustainable.
7. Earlier, a similar question came up before the Full Bench of the High
Court of Andhra Pradesh in Oleti Tirupathamma v. District Supply Officer
(City) Visakhapatnam and others1, wherein the Court held as follows –
“A statutory authority, it is trite, must act within the four corners
of the statute in terms of the statutory orders and procedure laid down
to suspend the license. As already noticed hereinbefore, the
authorities under the relevant orders have power to suspend the
authorization or license of the dealer. Without applying its mind and
without taking recourse thereto, the Court should not normally permit
the authorities, unless extraordinary situation exists, to allow them to
do something indirectly, which they cannot do it directly. If a broad
proposition to this effect is laid down, the same, in a given case may
amount to abuse of the process of law. The High Court while
exercising its jurisdiction under Article 226 of the Constitution of India,
acts sentinel qui vive and thus it has to protect the citizen from
arbitrary and capricious action of the executive. If the licensing
authority themselves upon application of mind come to the conclusion
that the irregularities committed by the fair price shop dealer would
warrant suspension of his licence, it may do so. But, in our considered
opinion, the authority without taking recourse to the said action,
cannot, refuse to supply the essential commodities. In the event an
order of suspension of licence is passed, the authorities will have to
make an alternative arrangement. But, in a case of this nature, the
card holders would be the worst sufferers inasmuch their essential
commodities would not be supplied to them at all.”
1
2002 (1) ALD 577
6
8. In view of the law laid down by Full Bench of the High Court of Andhra
Pradesh in the aforesaid decision, this Court is of the opinion that the action of
the respondents is illegal and arbitrary. Therefore, the respondents are
directed to supply essential commodities to the petitioner by allowing him to
distribute the same to the cardholders, allotted to his fair price shop, till his
dealership is terminated or till passing an order under Clause 8(4) of the
Control Order, 2018.
9. Accordingly, the Writ Petition is disposed of directing the authorities to
continue to supply the essential commodities to the FP shop of the petitioner.
In case the respondent authorities intend to take action against the
irregularities, if any, committed by the petitioner, they can take steps in
accordance with law. There shall be no order as to costs.
As a sequel thereto, interlocutory applications pending, if any in the Writ
Petition, shall also stand closed.
____________________________
JUSTICE RAVI CHEEMALAPATI
29.04.2026
MP
7
154
THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE RAVI CHEEMALAPATI
WRIT PETITION NO.11720 of 2026
29.04.2026
MP
