The Hon’ble Sri Justice C.V. Nagarjuna Reddy Writ Petition No.39592 of 2014 Dated: 24.12.2014 Between:
G.Keshava Reddy ..
Petitioner and The State of Andhra Pradesh, Rep. by its Principal Secretary, Civil Supplies Department, Secretariat, Hyderabad, and 4 others.
..
Respondents Counsel for the petitioner: Mr. K.Narsi Reddy Counsel for the respondents: A.G.P. for Civil Supplies (AP) The Court made the following:
Order:
This Writ Petition is filed for quashing the show cause notice in RC.No.2260/2014/F, dated 24-09-2014, issued by respondent No.4.
I have heard the learned Counsel for the petitioner and the learned Assistant Government Pleader for Civil Supplies (AP) representing the respondents.
The impugned show cause notice was issued with the following charges:
“Charge No.1.: That the F.P.Shop dealer has not distributed the Essential commodities to the cardholders properly. He is distributing the Essential Commodities to some of the cardholders only and thereby, contravened Cl.17(1) of the A.P.S.P.D.S.(Control) Order, 2008.
Charge No.2: That the F.P.Shop dealer has not distributed the Essential Commodities i.e., Sugar, K.Oil, R.G.Dal etc., and he is distributing the same bi- monthly instead of monthly and thereby, contravened Cl.5 (1) (A), 17 (a) and 17 (b) of A.P.S.P.D.S. (Control) Order, 2008.”
As rightly pleaded by the petitioner and submitted by the learned Counsel representing him, both the charges are too vague and non-specific to warrant initiation of any action against the petitioner.
Under Charge No.1, respondent No.4 has failed to give the details as to the number of cardholders to whom the petitioner has failed to distribute the essential commodities. Unless a specific allegation in this regard is made, the petitioner is not expected to furnish any meaningful reply.
Similarly, under Charge No.2, it is alleged that the petitioner has been distributing the essential commodities such as sugar, kerosene oil, red gram dal etc., bi-monthly instead of monthly. Indeed, the petitioner has replied in his explanation that he has been distributing all the essential commodities to all the 296 cardholders every month and that the Civil Supplies Deputy Tahsildars of Cheenekothapalli and Kanaganipalli and the Mandal Revenue Officer have been inspecting his fair price shop regularly and that no allegations whatsoever were made by any cardholder so far.
A perusal of both the charges would show that respondent No.4 has failed to refer to any of the registers being maintained by the petitioner or any complaint being made by any of the card holders. He has absolutely allowed himself to be guided by the purported report, dated 19-09-2014, of respondent No.5. Ex facie both the charges are liable to be quashed as they suffer from the vices of vagueness, absence of details and ambiguity.
For the above-mentioned reasons, the impugned show cause notice in RC.No.2260/2014/F, dated 24-09-2014, issued by respondent No.4, is quashed. The respondents are directed to continue the petitioner as the fair price shop dealer and forthwith allow him to distribute the essential commodities to the card holders.
The Writ Petition is, accordingly, allowed.
As a sequel to disposal of the Writ Petition, WPMP.No.49655 of 2014, filed by the petitioner for interim relief, is disposed of as infructuous.
(C.V. Nagarjuna Reddy, J) Dt: 24th December, 2014 lur