(Prayer: 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, order or direction more particularly one in the nature of writ of Mandamus to declare the action of the 3rd Respondent in suspending the authorization of the Petitioner in respect of Fair Price Shop No.1303029, Malapalli Village, Mantralayam Mandal, Kurnool District vide proceedings in Rc.(M) No.2180/2025 dated 11.12.2025 as illegal, arbitrary, violative of principles of natural justice and in violation of Article 14 and 21 of the Constitution of India and consequently set aside the proceedings in Rc. (M) No.2180/2025 dated 11.12.2025 issued by the 3rd Respondent and pass

IA NO: 1 OF 2025

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 in respect of Fair Price Shop No.1303029 by suspending the impugned proceedings Rc.(M) No.2180/2025 dated 11.12.2025 issued by the 3rd Respondent pending disposal of the writ petition.)

1. This writ petition is filed questioning the orders dated 11.12.2025 passed by respondent no.3 vide Rc.(M) No.2180/2025 suspending the petitioner’s authorization in respect of FP Shop No.1303029, Malapalli Village, Mantralayam Mandal, Kurnool District.

2. Heard Sri B.Sarvotham Reddy, learned counsel for the petitioner, and Sri Appasani Vineeth, learned Assistant Government Pleader for Civil Supplies.

3. Sri B.Sarvotham Reddy, learned counsel, while reiterating the contents of the writ affidavit would contend that the authorities, on as many as on eight (08) charges such as the petitioner has not produced authorization, did not display stock-cum-price list, not supplying commodities in authorized premises, used abusive language at the time of distribution to the card holders 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 and 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 that the petitioner had contravened various clauses of the Control Order, 2018, 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. This Court vide orders dated 20.12.2025, suspended the impugned orders.

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. It is fairly conceded by the learned Assistant Government Pleader that enquiry had not been completed so far.

9. In view of the above, without going into the merits of the matter, the writ petition can be disposed of with the following direction:

                  “The authorities shall conclude the enquiry at an earliest. Till conclusion of enquiry, the interim orders passed by this Court on 20.12.2025 shall continue.”

10. Accordingly, the writ petition is disposed of. There shall be no order as to costs.

Pending miscellaneous petitions, if any, shall stand closed.