Partner Thanupunuri Venkateshwarulu v. Union of lndia

by its Partner M. Srinivas Yadav

15.M. Srinivas Yadav, Sio. Late Malkaiah, Age. 57 years Rl/o. H.No. 7-167, Mahatma Gandhi Road Bhudan Pochampalli - 508284 Yadadri District,Telangana

16.Ravi Krishna Rice lndustry, Suryapet, Telangana Rep. by its Partner Gunda Krishna

17.Gunda Krishna, S/o. Gopaiah, Age. 63 years R/o. H.No. 1-4-249138/4, Vidyanagar Suryapet, Telangana - 5082'13 ?

18.Sri Santhoshimatha Binni Rice Mill, Penpahad Mandal, Suryapet District Rep. by its Partner Veeramalla Rambabu l9.Veeramalla Rambabu, S/o. Bikshan, Age. 36 years Rl/o. H. No. 1-290, Gaddi Pally Garedipally Mandal, Suryapet Districl 508201 Telangana ...PETITIONERS AND 1 2 J UNION OF lNDlA, Union of lndia Rep. by its Principal Secretary, Ministry of Consumer Affairs, Food and Public Distribution Food Corporation of lndia, Having its regional office at 3rd Floor, HACA Bhavan, Public Gardens Road, Nam'pally- 500 004, Telangana Rep by its. Director Telangana State Civil Supplies Corporation Limited, Having its registered office at 6-3-655/1/A, Block-B, Civil Supplies Bhavan, Somajiguda, Hyderabad-500082 Rep. by its Vice Chairman and [Vianaging Director, ...RESPONDENTS Petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of lndia praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed therewith, the High Court may be pleased to issue an appropriate writ, order or direction, more particulariy one in the nature of writ of Mandamus (i) declaring the actions of the Respondents in rejecting the delivery of FRK rice made by the Petitioners for Crop Year 2023-24 as being illegal, arbitrary, unjust, apart from being unconstitutional and contrary to doctrine of legitimate expectation and consequently set aside the same and (ii) consequently set aside the inspection conducted by the 1st Respondent whereby the 1st Respondent sought to reject the LOTs of ACK's submitted by the Petitioners and all the consequential actions therein, (iii) to further set aside the communication dated 12.06.2024 issued by the 2nd Respondent thereby rejecting the LOTs of ACK's'submitted by the Petitioners as being illegal, arbitrary, unjust, apart from being unconstitutional and contrary to doctrine of legitimate expectation and consequently set aside the same and consequently direct the 2nd Respondent to accept the future deliveries of Rice by the Petitioner rice millers to the 2nd Respondent without any reference to the alleged rejection communicated vide

12.06.2024. lA NO: 2 OF 2024 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 stay 8 the Analysis Report dated 11.06.2024 including all the consequential actions / further proceedings, pending disposal of the present Writ Petition.\ lA NO: 1 OF 2024 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 accept the FRK rice being delivered by the Petitioner, during the crop years 2023-2024 including all the future deliveries without reference to the alleged rejection of the 2nd Respondent, communicated by the 2nd Respondent vide Communication dated 12.06.2024 during the pendency of the writ petition. lA NO: 3 OF 2024 Between: Union Of India, Union of lndia Rep. by its Principal Secretary, Ministry of Consumer Affairs, Food and Public Distribution ...PETITIONEFYl "t RESPONDENT AND 2 4 3 5 1 Yadadri Bhongir District Rice Millers Association, Having its. registered office at Y.L.NS Coirplex, Shop no. 4and5, Bhongir - 508116, District, Telangana Being represented by its President, Mutha Venkatesham Martha Venkatesham, S/o. Late Vasudev Age 58 years, Occ. President Ri./o. H. No. 3-1-165/5D, Vidyanagar, Bhongir - 5081 16, Telangana Suryapet District Rice lt/lillers Association, Having its registered office at Rep. by its Partner Vempathi Madhu Vempathi Madhu, S/o. Kanthaiah Aged about 65 years, Occ. President of Suryhpet District Rice Millers Association Fi/o. Kodad, Suryapet, 508 2'13 ' Telangana Manikanta Parboiled Rice lndustries, Yadadri District, Bhuvanagiri, Telangana Rep. by its Partner Martha Venkatesham Mis. VUaya Lakshmi Binny Rice Mill, Yadadri District, Bhuvanagiri, Telangana Rep. by its Partner Jilla Venkata Ramana Jilla Venkata Ramana, S/o. Late Veeresham Age. 60 years Occ. Partner, R/o. H. No. 1-3-101, Kisaan Nagar, Bhongir- 508116 Yadadri Rice lndustries, Yadadri District, Bhongir Rep. by its Partner Juluri Ram Mohan Juluri Ram Mohan, S/o. Rajaiah, Age. 44 years Occ. Partner, Rl/o. Flat No. '102, Jayabheri Towers, Pra6hath Nagar, ChaitanyaPuri Hyderabad - 500060 10. Sri Vijaya Durga Parboiled Rice Industries, Yadadri District, Bhuvanagiri, 7 8 I 6 Telangana Rep. by its Partner Y. Sudhakar Reddy

11.Y. Sudhakar Reddy, Sio. Narayan Reddy, Age.69 years^f,yo' Plot No' 32, Vanasthali Puram, LB Nagar, Hyderabad, Telangana - 500070 9

12. Shiva sai Mallikarjuna Rice tvill, Yadadri District, Bhuvanagiri, Telangana Rep. by its Partner S. Narsi Reddy 13.S. Narsi Reddy, Amrutha Reddy, ASg.{9 years R/o. H' No' 3-126' - posanit<unta, Thlkkapuram Atmakui Mandal, Yadadri District,Telangana 14. Shubhodaya Rice lndustries, Yadadri District, Bhuvanagiri, Telangana Rep' by its Partner M. Srinivas Yadav

15. Ml. Srinivas Yadav, S/o. Late Malkaiah, Age. 57 vears R/o' H'No 7-167' ." rvi"r,airni--cinor,i noaJ-' ehrtjn- i,ocirimparii _ OoB284 yadadri 16.Ravi Krishna Rice lndustry, Suryapet, Telangana Rep' by its Partner Gunda District,Telangana Krishna l7.Gunda Krishna, S/o. Gopaiah, Age. 63 years R/o. H'No' 1-4-24913814' Vidyanagar Suryapet, Telangana - 508213

18.Sri Santhoshimatha Binni Rice Mill, Penpahad Mandal, suryapet District Rep. by its Partner Veeramalla Rambabu lg.Veeramalla Rambabu, S/o. Bikshan, Age. 36 years Fl/o' H No' 1-290, Gaddi Pally Garedipally Mandat, Suryapet District- 508201 Telangana rporation of lndia, Having its regional office at 3rd Floor, HACA FuOrii-eatO"ns Road, Nim'paiiy- 500 004' Telangana Rep by its ...WRIT PETITIONERS/RESPONDENTS

20. Food Co Bhavan, Director

2.1 .Telangana state civil supplies corp_oration Lrmited, Having its registered - 6m""iio-s-ossltln, atobk-B, civil supplies Bhavan, Somajiguda, HvoerJuio-sooO82 Rep. by its Vice Chairman and Managing Director, ...RESPONDENTS/RESPONDENTS Petition under section 151 CPC praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed in support of the petition, the High Coud may be pleased to vacate the interim order passed in l.A.No.1 of 2024 in w.P. No. 15926 of 2024 dtd- 01 .07.2024. lA NO: 4 OF 2024 Between: Food corporation of lndia, Having its regional office at 3rd Floor, HACA Bhavan, FrUfic Ca?o"nJRoad, Nam'pally--500 0-04, Telangana Rep by its Director ...PETITIONER/RESPONDENT No'2 AND 1 Yadadri Bhongir District Rice Millers Association, Having aii.[.flS Coftplex, Shop no. 4and5, Bhongir -.5081 16' Being represented by its President, Mutha Venkatesham its registered office District, Telangana 10

2. Martha Venkatesham, S/o. Late Vasudev Age 58 years, Occ. President F/o. H. No.3-1-165/5D, Vidyanagar, Bhongir- 5081 16, Telangana

3. Suryapet District Rice Millers Association, Having its registered office at Rep. by its Partner Vempathi Madhu

4. Vempathi Madhu, S/o. Kanthaiah Aged about 65 years, Occ. President of Surybpet District Rice Millers Association Fl/o. Kod-ad, Suryapet,508 213, Telangana

5. Manikanta Parboiled Rice lndustries, Yadadri District, Bhuvanagiri, Telangana Rep. by its Partner Martha Venkatesham

6. Mis. Vijaya Lakshmi Binny Rice Mill, Yadadri District, Bhuvanagiri, Telangana Rep. by its Partner Jilla Venkata Ramana

7. Jitla Venkata Ramana, S/o. Late Veeresham Age. 60 years Occ. Partner, Fyo. H. No. 1 -3-101 , Kisaan Nagar, Bhongir- 5081 16 B. Yadadri Rice lndustries, Yadadri District, Bhongir Rep. by its Partner Juluri Ram Mohan

9. Juluri Ram Mohan, S/o. Rajaiah, Age. 44 years Occ. Partner, Rl/o. Flat No. 102, Jayabheri Towers, Prabhath Nagar, ChaitanyaPuri Hyderabad - 500060 10. Sri VUaya Durga Parboiled Rice lndustries, Yadadri District, Bhuvanagiri, Telangana Rep. by its Partner Y. Sudhakar Reddy

11.Y. Sudhakar Reddy, S/o. Narayan Reddy, Age.69 years Rl/o. Plot No.32, Vanasthali Puram, LB Nagar, Hyderabad, Telangana - 500070 '12. Shiva Sai Mallikarjuna Rice Mill, Yadadri District, Bhuvanagiri, Telangana Rep. by its Partner S. Narsi Reddy

13.S. Narsi Reddy, Amrutha Reddy, Age.40 years Fl/o. H. No.3-126, Posanikunta, Thukkapuram Atmakur Mandal, Yadadri District,Telangana '14. Shubhodaya Rice lndustries, Yadadri District, Bhuvanagiri, Telangana Rep. by its Partner N/. Srinivas Yadav

15.M. Srinivas Yadav, S/o. Late Malkaiah, Age. 57 years R/o. H.No. 7-'167, Mahatma Gandhi Road Bhudan Pochampalli - 508284 Yadadri District,Telangana

16. Ravi Krishna Rice lndustry, Suryapet, Telangana Rep. by its Partner Gunda Krishna

17.Gunda Krishna, S/o. Gopaiah, Age. 63 years Fl/o. H.No. 1-4-24913814, Vidyanagar Suryapet, Telangana - 508213

18.Sri Santhoshimatha Binni Rice Mill, Penpahad Mandal, Suryapet District Rep. by its Partner Veeramalla Rambabu l9.Veeramalla Rambabu, Sio. Bikshan, Age. 36 years F/o. H. No. 1-290, Gaddi Pally Garedipally Mandal, Suryapet District- 508201 Telangana ...WRIT PETITIONERS/RESPONDENTS

20.Union Of lndia, Union of lndia Rep. by its Principal Secretary, Ministry of Consumer Affairs, Food and Public Distribution 2l.Telangana State Civil Supplies Corporation Limited, Having its registered office at 6-3-655/1iA, Block-B, Civil Supplies Bhavan, Somajiguda, Hyderabad-500082 Rep. by its Vice Chairman and Managing Director, ...RESPONDENTS/RESPONDENTS Petition under Section 1 51 CPC praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed in support of the petition, the High Court may be pleased to vacate the interim orderdated 01-07- 2024in WP No. 15926 of 2024 and dismiss the above referred Writ Petition. Counsel for the Petitioners: SRI PASHAM MOHITH Counsel for the Respondent No.1 SRI A.S.VASUDEVAN & SRI K.L.N.RAGHAVENDRA REDDY, Assisting SRI B.NARASIMHA SHARMA ADDL.SOLICITOR GENERAL OF INDIA Counsel forthe Respondent No.2: SRI DOMINIC FERNANDES, SC FOR FCI Counsel forthe Respondent No.3 : SRI T.P.ACHARYA, SC FOR TSCSC W.P.No.19'107 OF 2024 Between:

1. Mis. Varalaxmi lndustries, Dammakkapet Village, Huzurabbd Mandal, Karimnagar District, represented by its Managing Partner, K. Krishnamurthy S/o. Ramaiah, Age. 53 Years.

2. Mts. Sri Durga Traders, C/o. Devi lndustries, Shamshabad- . Village, Manakondur Mandal, Karimnagar District, represented by its Managing Partner, Akula Shashivardan S/o. Rajaram, Age. 33 Years.

3. M/s. Sri Kanyaka Parameshwari Trading C-o ,, l<gsfqvgpatnam. Village, Shankarpatnam Mandal, Karimnagar District, C/o. Balakrishna Modem Rice and Oil Mill, represented by its M-anaging Partner, Paladugula Shiva Kumar S/o. Jagadishwaraiah, Age. 55 Years. ...PETITIONERS AND 1 The State of Telangana, represented by its Principal Secretary .to. the Consumer Affairs, Fo6d and Civil Supplies Department, Secretariat Buildings' Hyderabad.

2. The Collector (CS), Karimnagar District, Karimnagar. 3. The Telangana State Civil Supplies Corporation, repregented by 1t9-!i9.e Chairman 5nd Managing Directiri, having its registered office at 6-3-655/1/A, Block B, Civil Supplies Bhavan, Somajiguda, Hyderabad.

4. The District Manager, Telangana State Civil Supplies Corporation, Nizamabad District, Nizamabad.

5. Food Corporation of lndia, represented by its Director, having its office at 3rd Floor, HACA Bhavan, Public Gardens Road, Nampally, Hyderabad.

6. The District Manager, Food Corporation of lndia, Karimnagar District' Karimnagar.

7. The Depot Manager, Food Corporation of lndia, Buffer Storage Complex, Korapally Road, Jammikunta, Karimnagar District. l2 ...RESPONDENTS Petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of lndia praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed therewith, the High Court may be pleased to issue an order or direction more particularly one in the nature of writ of mandamus or any other appropriate writ declaring the action of the respondent No. 7 in issuing 3 letters in Lr. No. BSC/JMKT/RD(S and R) BRL STACKS/2024- 25, dated 11-07-2024, to the petitioners directing them to replace the stocks of rice which were delivered by them between 18-03-2024 to 05-05-2024 till the same is replaced their new consignments of stock of rice will not be accepted, is nothing but arbitrary, illegal, null and void and violative of principles of natural justice and also violative of Articles 1 4, 19 and 21 of lhe Constitution of lndia. Consequently set aside the said 3letters dated 11-O7-2024, thereby direct the respondent authorities No's. 5 to 7 to receive the fresh consignment of the stocks of rice after analyzing and in case it is found it is in accordance with their specifications. lA NO: 1 OF 2024 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 3 letters in Lr. No. BSC/JMKT/RD(S and R) BRL STACKS/2O24-25, dated 11-O7-2024, issued by the respondent No. 7, thereby direct the respondent No's. 5 to 7 authorities to receive the new consignment of stock of rice from the petitioners rice mills, in case the same is found on analysis as per their specifications. lA NO: 2 OF 2024 Between:

1. Food Corpora_tion of lndia, represented by its Director, having its ofiice at 3rd Floor, HACA Bhavan, Public Gardens Ro5d, Nampally, nyOebOaO.

2. The District Karimnagar. Manager, Food Corporation of lndia, Karimnagar District, 3 The Depot Manager, Food Corporation of lndia, Buffer Storage Complex, Korapally Road, Jammikunta, Karimnagar District. ...PETITIONERS/RESPONDENTS No.5to7 l3 AND 1 2 2 4 5 6 7 M/s.Varalaxmilndustries,DammakkapetVillage,HuzurabadMandal' klrlmnatir Oistrict, representeO Uy its Mhnaging Fartner, K' Krishnamurthy S/o. Rariaiah, Age. 53 Years. M/s. Sri Durga Traders, C/o. Devi lndustries, Shamshabad-. Village' rvialiar<6nori-rfiinoat, rarimnagar District, represented by its Managing pirtner, Akula Shashivardan S/o. Rajaram, Age. 33 Years' t\I/s Sri Kanvaka Parameshwari Trading Co.', Keshavapatnam. Village' 6'nl"f.-".jtn"i, H71anOii, karlmnagar Distri-ct, C/o. Balakrishna Modem Rice ;il'cjil'[/ill,;piJJ"nteo by its M-anaging Partner, Paladugula Shiva Kumar S/o. Jagadishwiraiah, Age. 55 Years. ...RESPONDENTS/PETITIONERS The State of Telangana, represented by- its Principal Secretary to -the consumer Affairs, Food and civil supplies Department, secretanat Hullorngs' Hyderabad. The Collector (CS), Karimnagar District, Karimnagar' The Telanoana State Civil Supplies Corporation, represented -by itg- yi9.e Cr,lirrli'SiJi1inrging Dir";-t6i having its.registered office at 6-3-655/'1lA, Bio;i B, Civil Supplie! B-havan, Somajiguda' Hvderabad TheDistrictManager,TelanganaStatecivilsuppliesCorporation,Nizamabad District, Nizamabad. ...RESPONDENTS/RESPONDENTS 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 vacatetheinterimorderdatedlg-07-2024inWPNo.19107of2024anddismiss the above referred Writ Petition. Counsel for the Petitioners : SRI K.VENUMADHAV Counsel for the Respondent No.1to4 : GP FOR CIViLS SUPPLIES Counsel for the Respondent No.5to7: SRI DOMINIC FERNANDES' SG FOR FCI W.P.N o.19159 OF 2024 Between: 1 2 3 M/s. Veeraanianeya lndustries, Poosala (V), Sulthanabad (M) Peddapalli- 505 i65, i;6;g;h; ei:ing represented bv its'P5rtner Manoj Kumar Gaddam M:#ti:fl A:ffslll'fi ',3:V::)3fl fi'Jll,'jiltT'?'i!3Hb^n'iK?1"'333: (M) Peddapalli- 505 1 85,Telansana i;lioilil Roua, Annaouma lndustries (Withdrawn), Kalvacheda. (V! . ijffi5;;E- s'O5zi2, ierahgana Rep.'6y its Partner Koleti Satyanarayana Ramagiri . -(M)' -Suhhanabad l4

4. Koleti Satyanarayana (Withdrawn), S/o.Nagabhushanam , Age.48 years, Occ. Partner of Annapuma lndustries PJo. 4-3-21515/8/1, Bhumnagar, Peddapalle, Karim Nagar -5O5 172, Telangana

5. M/s. Ramaiah lndustries (Withdrawn), Having its office at Poosala (V) (M), Sultanabad Peddapalli- 505 185, Telangana Rep. by its Partner Samudrala Ramaiah

6. Samudrala Ramaiah (Withdrawn), S/o.Samudrala Shankaraiah, Age. 70 years Occ. Managing Partner of M/s. Ramaiah lndustries R/o. H. No, 3-28014, Gandhinagar Sulthanabad, Peddapalli- 505 185, Telangana 7. Mohankrishna lndustries (Withdrawn), Katnapally (V), Peddapalli- 505 525, Telangana Rep, by its Ko mu ravelliRa m u lu Sulthanabad (M), Managing Partner B. Komuravelli Ramulu (Withdrawn), S/o. KomuravelliVishwanatham, Age. 70 years Occ.Partner of Mohankrishna lndustries R/o. House No. 3- 145, Main Road, Sultanabad Peddapalli- 505 185, Telangana. The WP is dismissed as withdrawn insofar as Petitioner Nos. 3 to 8 is concerned as per C.O.dt. 19.07.2024. AND 1 Union of lndia, Rep. by its Principal Secretary, Ministry of Consumer Affairs, Food and Public Distribution

2. Food Corporation of India, Having its regional office at 3rd Floor, HACA Bhavan, Public Gardens Road, Nampally- 500 004, Telangana Rep by its Director ,..PETITIONERS

3. Telangana State Civil Supplies Corporation Limited, Having its registered office at 6-3-655/'llA, Block-B, Civil Supplies Bhavan, Somajiguda, Hyderabad-500082 Rep. by its Vice Chairman and Managing Director. 4. Warehouse Manager, Telangana State Warehousing Corporation PEG Karimanagar ...RESPONDENTS Petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of lndia praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed therewith, the High Court may be pleased to issue an appropriate writ, order or direction more particularly one rn the nature of writ of Mandamus (i) declaring the actions of the Respondents in rejecting the delivery of FRK rice made by the Petitioners for Crop Year 2023-24 as being illegal, arbitrary, unjust, apart from being unconstitutional and contrary to doctrine of legitimate expectation and consequently set aside the same and (ii) consequently set aside the inspection conducted by the 1st Respondent whereby the 1st Respondent sought to reject the LOTs of ACK's submitted by the Petitioners and all the consequential actions therein (iii) to further set aside the communication dated 12.07.2024 issued by the 4th Respondent thereby communicating the rejection to the Petitioners as being illegal, arbitrary, unjust, apart from being unconstitutional and contrary to doctrine of legitimate expectation and consequently set aside the same and consequently direct the 2nd Respondent to accept the future deliveries of Rice by the Petitioner rice millers to the 2nd Respondent without any reference to the alleged rejection t5 communicated vide 1 2.O7 2024. lA NO: 1 OF 2024 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 accept the FRK rice being delivered by the Petitioner during the crop years 2023-2024 including all the future deliveries without reference to the alleged rejection of the 2nd Respondent, communicated by the 4th Respondent vide Communication daled 12.07.2024 during the pendency of the writ petition. lA NO: 2 OF 2024 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 stay the Analysis Report conducted in June, 2024 including all the consequential actions / further proceedings, pending disposat of the present Writ Petition. lA NO: 3 OF 2024 Between: Food Corporation of lndia, Having its regional office at 3rd Floor, HACA Bhavan, Public Gardens Road, Nampally- 500 004, Telangana Rep by its. Director ...PETITIONER/RESPONDENT No.2 AND 1 2 3 4 "Road, M/s. Veeraanjaneya lndustries, Poosala (V), Sulthanabad (M) Peddapalli- 505 185, Telangana Bbing represented by its Partner Manoj Kumar Gaddam Manoi Kumar Gaddam, S/o, Late NagabhushanamGaddam, Age. years, Occ. Mana'ging Partner of M/s. Veeraanjaneya lndustries R/o. H No. 2-289, Sulthanabad (M) Peddlpalfi- 505 18s,Telangana Poosala Annapuma lndustries Kalvacheda (V), Ramagiri (M), Peddapally- 505 212' Telangana Rep. by its Partner Koleti Satyanarayana Koteti Satyanarayana S/o.Nagabhushanam , Age.48 years, Occ. Partner of Annapurni lndu3tries No. 4-3-21515/8/1, Bhuhnagar, Peddapalle, Karim Nagar -505 1 7 2, f ebngana t6

5. M/s. Ramaiah lndustries Having its office at Poosala (V) (M), Sultanabad Peddapalli- 505 185, Telangana Rep. by its Partner Samudrala Ramaiah 6. Samudrala Ramaiah S/o.Samudrala Shankaraiah, Age. 70 years Occ. Managing Partner of M/s. Ramaiah lndustries Rl/o. H. No, 3-280/4, Gandhinagar Sulthanabad, Peddapalli- 505'185, Telangana

7. Mohankrishna lndustries Katnapally (V), Sulthanabad (M), Peddapalli- 505 525, Telangana Rep, by its Managing Partner KomuravelliRamulu

8. Komuravelli Ramulu S/o. KomuravelliVishwanatham, Age. 70 years Occ.Partner of Mohankrishna lndustries Rl/o. House No. 3-145, Main Road, Sultanabad Peddapalli- 505 185, Telangana.

9. Union of lndia, Rep. by its Principal Secretary, Ministry of Consumer Affairs, Food and Public Distribution ...RESPONDENTS/PETITIONERS l0.Telangana State Civil Supplies Corporation Limited, Having its registered office at 6-3-655/1/A, Block-B, Civil Supplies Bhavan, Somajiguda, Hyderabad-500082 Rep. by its Vice Chairman and Managing Director. l l.Warehouse Manager, Telangana State Warehousing Corporation PEG Karimanagar ...RESPONDENTS/RESPONDENTS 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 vacate the interim order daled 19-7-2024 in WP No. '19159 ol 2024 and dismiss the above referred Writ Petition. lA NO: 4 OF 2024 Between: Union of lndia, Rep. by its Principal Secretary, Ministry of Consumer Affairs, Food and Public Distribution ...PETITIONER/RESPONDENT No.1 AND 1 M/ 18 s.V 5,7 eeraanjaneya lndustries, Poosala (V), Sulthanabad (M) Peddapalli- 505 elangana Being represented by its P6rtner Manoj Kumar Gaddhm

2. Manoj Kumar Gaddam, S/o, Late NagabhushanamGaddam, Age. years, Occ. Managing Partner of M/s. Veeraanjaneya lndustries R/o. H No. 2-289, Poosala Road, Sulthanabad (M) Peddhpalli- 505 lSS,Telangana

3. Annapuma lnduskies Kalvacherla (V), Ramagiri (M), Peddapally- i}S 212, Telangana Rep. by its Partner Koleti Satyanarayana

4. Koleti Satyanarayana S/o. Nagabhushanam , Age.4B years, Occ. partner of Annapurna lndustries Ryo. 4:3-215/5/8/1 , Bhumnagdr, peddapaile, Karim Nagar -505 172, T elangana t7

5. M/s. Ramaiah lndustries Having its office at Poosala (V) (14' Sultanabad Peddapalli- 505 185, Telangana Rep. by its Partner Samudrala Ramaiah 6. Samudrala Ramaiah S/o.Samudrala Shankaraiah, Age. 70 years Occ. Managing Partner of M/s. Ramaiah lndustries Fi"/o. H. No, 3-280/4, Gandhinagar Sulthanabad, Peddapalli- 505 185, Telangana

7. Mohankrishna lndustries Katnapally (V), Sulthanabad (tt/), Peddapalli- 505 525, Telangana Rep, by its Managing Partner KomuravelliRamulu

8. Komuravelli Ramulu Sio. KomuravelliVishwanatham, Age. 70 years Occ.Partner of Mohankrishna lndustries Rl/o. House No. 3-145, Main Road, Sultanabad Peddapalli- 505 185, Telangana. ...RESPONDENTS/PETITIONERS

9. Food Corporation of lndia, Having its regional office at 3rd Floor, HACA Bhavan, Public Gardens Road, Nampally- 500 004, Telangana Rep by its. Director l0.Telangana State Civil Supplies Corporation Limited, Having its registered office at 6-3-655/1/A, Block-B, Civil Supplies Bhavan, Somajiguda, Hyderabad-500082 Rep. by its Vice Chairman and Managing Director. 1 1.Warehouse Manager, Telangana State Warehousing Corporation PEG Karimanagar ...RESPONDENTS/RESPONDENTS 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 vacate the interim order granted by this Hon'ble Court in lA No.1l2O24 in WP No. 1915912024 dated 23.07.2024 and dismiss the writ petition in the interest of justice. Counsel for the Petitioners: SRI PASHAM MOHITH Counsel for the Respondent No.1 SRI A.S.VASUDEVAN & SRI K.L.N.RAGHAVENDRA REDDY, Assisting SRI B.NARASIMHA SHARMA ADDL.SOLICITOR GENERAL OF INDIA Counsel for the Respondent No.2: SRI DOMINIC FERNANDES, SC FOR FCI Counsel for the Respondent No.3 : SRI T.P.ACHARYA, SC FOR TSCSC Counsel for the Respondent No.4 : SRI A.PHANI BHUSHAN, SC FOR TSWC W.P.No.19521 OF 2024 Between:

1. M/s. Sri Laxmi Venkateshwara Agro lndustries, Gollapally (V)' Yellareddipet(M), Rajanna Siricilla- 505304, Telangana Rep. by its Partner Satyanarayana Muthala l8 2 Sathvanaravana Muthyala, S/o. Muthyala Balaiah, Age ' .42 'Venkateshwara Agro lndustnes lvo' Partrier of niCharta Boppapur. Boppapuram, Karimnagar, Telangana 'Sri Laxmi H. No. Occ. 7-36, ...PETITIONERS AND

1. 2 3 4 Unionoflndia,Rep.byitsPrincipalsecretary,MinistryofConsumerAffairs, Food and Public Distribution Food Corooration of lndia, Havinq its regional office at 3rd Floor,. HACA b;;;r;,-{Jbii; crioens Road, Nimpallv--500 004, relansana Rep bv its' Director Food Corooration of lndia, Naqnur, Karimnagar Rep by its Manager (QC) Neeraia Complex Towards Ambedkar Stadium Mukarampura, Kanmnagar Telangana Telanoana State Civil Supplies Corporation Limited' Having its registered ;il"";t o-s-6sslrln, bioct<-B, bivit Supplies Bhavan,. Somajiguda' UVJeraO-O-SOO0B2 Rep. by its Vice Chairman and Managing Director' ...RESPONDENTS Petition under Article 226 of the constitution of lndia praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed therewith, the High court may be pleased to issue an appropriate writ, order or direction, more particularly one in the nature of writ of Mandamus. (i) declaring the actions of the Respondents in freezing the stacks of FRK rice delivered by the Petitioners for crop Year 2023-24 as being illegal, arbitrary, unjust, apart from being unco nstitutional and contrary to doctrine of legitimate expectalion and consequently set aside the communication dated 10.07.2024 and 20.07.2024 issued by 3rd Respondent thereby directing freezing of stacks delivered by the Petitioner. (ii) declaring the subsequent actions of the Respondents in not accepting FRK rice being delivered by the Petitioners for Crop Year 2023-24 as being illegal, arbitrary, unjust, apart from being unconstitutional and contrary to doctrine of legitimate expectation and consequently direct the Respondents to accept the future deliveries of FRK Rice by the Petitioner to the Respondents (iii) to further set aside the inspection conducted by the 1st Respondent whereby the 1st Respondent sought to reject the LoTs of ACK'.s submitted by the Petitioners and all the consequential actions therein, (vi) to further set aside the communication dated 20.o7.2024 issued by the 3rd Respondent thereby communicating about the freezing of the stocks to the Petitioners as being illegal, arbitrary, unjust, apart from being unconstitutional and contrary to doctrine of legitimate expectation and consequently set aside the same. IANO:2OF 2024 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 stay the Analysis Report conducted on 12 06'2024 including all the consequential actions / further proceedings, pending disposal of the present writ Petition' IA NO: 10F 2024 petition under section 1s1 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 accept the FRK rice being delivered by the Petitioner during the crop years 2023-2024 including all the future deliveries reference to the alleged rejection of the 1st Respondent during the pendency of without . the writ Petition. IANO:3O F 2024 ""T"ii:1,"":ts;[f; :%##'ft;X.1|[3,,if','L'nliffi 'o8T,"?"?ffi ',1i'fi3',ff 3l Director ' ["":?,3"'E3,fJ'31 ?:fiJft Telangana rx?fl [JIi5' !,[tffi $; P' H#:',y'', i'1?il "!i:] "''ET'''.NERS/RESP.NDENTS No'2&3 AND 1 2 3 4 Yli;*i,li*,tffi lh"iX,i,ll"3ffl,ll'iiout8ll'Jilo,.'tTffi SatyanaraYana Muthala i#ri5r:".ufli"foif*Hiilsfu l4:[*rAn"c/r"'"n'3 Racharla BoPPaPur' uoPPal 'k"on"Jf ig'" (v), artner Occ. 7-36, ,nion of rndia, Rep. by its principar Secretary, Ministry of consumer Affairs' Food and Public Distributron ".RESPONDENTS/PETITIONERS ll*ltm:ts*Wi9$iv:ii;xr*'r[#H:"'"!d;fi 'i;*r*::"": ...RESPONDENTS/RESPONDENTS 20 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 vacate the interim order dated 23-07-2024 in WP No. 19521 of 2024 and dismiss the above referred Writ Petition. lA NO: 4 OF 2024 Between: '1 . Union of lndia, Rep. by its Principal Secretary, Ministry of Consumer Affairs, Food and Public Distribution ...PETITIONERS/RESPONDENTS No.1 AND 1 M/s. Sri Laxmi Venkateshwara A Yellareddipet(M), Rajanna Siricilla- 5053 Satyanarayana Muthala gro lndustries, Gollapally (V), 04, Telangana Rep. by its Partner

2. Sathyanarayana Muthyala, S/o. Muthyala Balaiah, Age. 42 years. Occ. Partner of Sri Laxmi Venkateshwara Agro lndustries Rlio. H. No. 7-36, Racharla Boppapur. Boppapuram, Karimnagar, Telangana ... RESPONDENTS/PETITIONERS 3. Food Corporation of lndia, Having its regional office at 3rd Floor, HACA Bhavan, Public Gardens Road, Nampally- 500 004, Telangana Rep by its. Director

4. Food Corporation of lndia, Nagnur, Karimnagar Rep by its Manager (QC) Ne.eraja Complex Towards Ambedkar Stadium [\ilukardmpura, Kaiimn-agar Telangana

5. Te-langana State Civil Supplies Corporation Limited, Having its registered office at 6-3-655/'llA, Block-B, Civil Supplies Bhavan-, Somajiguda, Hyderabad-500082 Rep. by its Vice Chairman and Managing Director. ' - ... RESPONDENTS/RESPONDENTS 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 vacate the interim order granted by this Hon'ble Court in lA No.1l2O24 in WP No. 1952112024 dated 23.07 .2024 and dismiss the writ petition in the interest of justice. Counsel for the Petitioners: SRI PASHAM MOHITH Counsel for the Respondent No.1 o.. "o Yt"%,,=or,il*B* *.rr", : 2t ffii:s3.:51'".nY-?Hll3litrf Counsel for the Respondent No.2&3: SRI DOMINIC FERNANDES' SC FOR FCI Counsel for the Respondent No.4 : SRI T.P.AGHARYA, SC FOR TSCSC W.P.No.19546 OF 2024 Between:

1. .Saraswathi Rice Tech Pvt Ltd, Kolanur (V), Konoraopet (M), Ralanna siricilla, Telangana Rep. by its lVanaging Director Cheeti lndira 2- Cheeti lndira, Wio. Cheeti Narayan Rao, Age. 56 years, Occ' Managhg - OiieJto."iSiraswathi Rice Tech Pvt Ltd F/o. 2=-5-10/1,-Ananth Nagar, Siricilla Mandal, Karimnagar -505301 , Telangana ,..PETITIONERS AND 1 Union of lndia, Rep. by its Principal Secretary, Ministry of Consumer Affairs, 2 3 4 Food and Public Distribution Food CorDoration of lndia, Having its regional office at 3rd Floor, I-'IACA Ahlvan, PuOiic Gardens Road, Nampally- 500 004, Telangana Rep by its' Director Food Comoration of lndia, Nagnur, Karimnagar Rep by its Manager (QC) fleeiaja iomplex Towards Aribedkar Stadium Mukarampura, Karimnagar Telangana Telanoana State Civil Supplies Corporation Limited,, Having its registered 6mc"ii o-g-Oss/1/A, Bloci(-B, Civil supplies Bhavan, Somajiguda' ftyoeriuad-soo082 Rep. by its Vice Chiirman and Managing Director' ...RESPONDENTS Petition under Article 226 of the constitution of lndia praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed therewith, the High court may be pleased to issue an appropriate writ, order or direction. more particularly one in the nature of writ of Mandamus- (i)declaring the actions of the Respondents in freezing the stacks of FRK rice delivered by the Petitioners for crop Year 2023-24 as being illegal, arbitrary, unjust, apart from being unconstitutional and contrary to doctrine of legitimate expectation and consequently set aside the communication dated .10.07.2024 and 20.07.2024 issued by 3rd Respondent thereby directing freezing of stacks delivered by the Petitioner. (ii)declaring the subsequent actions of the Respondents in not accepting FRK rice being delivered by the Petitioners for Crop Yeat 2023-24 as being illegal' arbitrary' unjust, apart from being unconstitutional and contrary to doctrine of legitimate expectation and 22 consequen y direct the Respondents to accept the future deliveries of FRK Rice by the Petitioner to the Respondents to further set aside the inspection conducted by the 1st Respondent whereby the 1st Respondent sought to reject the LoTs of ACK s submitted by the Petitioners and all the consequential actions therein. (iv)to further set aside the communication dated 20.07.2024 issued by the 3rd Respondent thereby communicating about the freezing of the stocks to the Petitioners as being illegal, arbitrary, unjust, apart from being u nco nstitutional and contrary to doctrine of legitimate expectation and consequently set aside the same. lA NO: 2 OF 2024 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 stay the Analysis Report conducted on 12.06.2024 including all the consequential actions / further proceedings, pending disposal of the present Writ Petition. lA NO: 1 OF 2024 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 accept the FRK rice being delivered by the Petitioner during the crop years 2023-2024 including all the future deliveries without reference to the alleged rejection of the 1st Respondent during the pendency of the writ petition. lA NO: 3 OF 2024 Between:

1. Food Corporation of lndia, Having its regional office at 3rd Floor, HACA Bhavan, Public Gardens Road, Nampally- 500 004, Telangana Rep by its. Director . 2. Food Corporation of lndia, Nagnur, Karimnagar Rep by its Manager (QC) Neeraja Complex Towards Ambedkar Stadium Mukarampura, Karimnagar Telangana AND ,| Saraswathi Rice Tech Pvt Ltd, Kolanur (V), Telangana Rep. by its Managing Director C Konoraopet (M), Raianna Siricilla, heeti lndira ...PETITIONERS/RESPONDENTS No.273

2. Cheeti lndira, Wo. Cheeti Narayan Rao, Age. 56 years, Occ. Managing Director of Saraswathi Rice Tech Pvt Ltd R/o. 2-5-1011 , Ananth Nagar, Siricilla Mandal, Karimnagar -505301 , Telangana

3. Union of lndia, Rep. by its Principal Secretary, Ministry of Consumer Affairs, Food and Public Distribution ...RESPONDENTS/PETITIONERS 23

4. Telangana State Civil Supplies Corporation Limited,, Having. its registered office Et 6-3-655/1/A, Block-B, Civil Supplies Bhavan, Somajiguda, Hyderabad-500082 Rep. by its Vice Chairman and Managing Director. . ...RESPONDENTS/RESPONDENTS 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 vacate the interim order dated 23-07 -2024 in WP No. 19456 ol 2024 and dismiss the above referred Writ Petition. lA NO: 4 OF 2024 Between: Union of lndia, Rep. by its Principal Secretary, Ministry of Consumer Affairs, Food and Public Distribution ...PETITIONERS/RESPONDENT No.1 AND 1 2 Saraswathi Rice Tech Pvt Ltd, Kolanur (V), Konoraopet (M), Rajanna Siricilla, Telangana Rep. by its Managing Director Cheeti lndira Cheeti lndira, Wo. Cheeti Narayan Rao, Age. 56 years, Occ. Malaging Director of Saraswathi Rice Tech Pvt Ltd R/o. 2-5-1011, Ananth Nagar, Siricilla Mandal, Karimnagar -505301 , Telangana ...RESPONDENTS/PETITIONERS 4 moration of lndia. Havinq its reqional office at 3rd Floor, HACA Public Gardens Road, NZmpall-y- 500 004, Telangana Rep by its.

3. Food Co Bhavan, Director Food Corooration of lndia, Naqnur, Karimnagar Rep by its Manager (QC) Neeraja Complex Towards Ambedkar Stadium Mukarampura, Karimnagar Telangana Telanoana State Civil Supplies Corporation Limited,, Having its registered office "at 6-3-655i 1/A, etobk-e, Civil supplies Bhavan, Somajiguda, Hyderabad-soO082 Rep. by its Vice Chairman and Managing Director. 5 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 ...RESPONDENTS vacate the interim order granted by this Hon'ble Court in lA No.1/2024 in WP No. 1954612024 daled 23.07 .2O24 and dismiss the writ petition in the interest of justice. 24 Counsel for the Petitioners: SRI PASHAM MOHITH counserrortheRespondentNo'1i[jfi []t]:"i1Htfif,l=,','Ji.^ ADDL.SOLICITOR GENERAL OF INDIA Counsel for the Respondent No.2&3: SRI DOMINIC FERNANDES, SC FOR FCI Counsel for the Respondent No.3 : SRI T.P.ACHARYA, SC FOR TSCSC W.P.No.19548 OF 2024 Between:

1. Annapurna lndustries, Kalvacherla (V), Ramagiri (M), Peddapally- 5O5 212, Telangana Rep. by its Partner Koleti Satyanarayana

2. Koleti Satyanarayana, S/o. Nagabhushanam , Age. 48 years, Occ. Partner of Annapurna lndustries PJo. 4-3-21515/8/1 , Bhumnagar, Peddapalle, Karim Nagar -505 172, f ehngana ...PETITIONERS AND 1 Union of lndia, Rep. by its Principal Secretary, Ministry of Consumer Affairs, Food and Public Distribution Food Corporation of lndia, Having its regional office at 3rd Floor, HACA Bhavan, Public Gardens Road, Nampally- 500 004, Telangana Rep by its. Director Telangana State Civil Supplies Corporation Limited, Having its registered office at 6-3-655/1/A, Block-B, Civil Supplies Bhavan, Somajiguda, Hyderabad-500082 Rep. by its Vice Chairman and Managing Director. Warehouse Manager, Telangana State Warehousing Corporation PEG Karimanagar ...RESPONDENTS 2 3 4 Petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of lndia praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed therewith, the High Court may be pleased to issue an appropriate writ, order or direction, more particularly one in the nature of writ of Mandamus (i) declaring the actions of the Respondents in rejecting the delivery of FRK rice made by the Petitioners for Crop Year 2023-24 as being illegal, arbitrary, unjust, apart from being unconstitutional and contrary to 25 doctrine of legitimate expectation and consequently set aside the same and (ii) consequently set aside the inspection conducted by the 1st Respondent whereby the 1st Respondent sought to reject the LOTs of ACKs submitted by the Petitioners and all the consequential actions therein, (iii) to further set aside the communication dated 12.07.2024 issued by the 4th Respondent thereby communicating the rejection to the Petitioners as being illegal, arbitrary, unjust, apart from being unconstitutional and contrary to doctrine of legitimate expeciation and consequently set aside the same and consequently direct the 2nd Respondent to accept the future deliveries of Rice by the Petitioner to the 2nd Respondent without any reference to the alleged rejection communicated vide 12.07.2024. lA NO: 'f OF 2024 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 accept the FRK rice being delivered by the Petitioner duringthecropyears2023.2024includingallthefuturedeliverieswithout reference to the alleged rejection of the 2nd Respondent, communicated by the 4thRespondentvideCommunicationdaledl2.0T.2024duringthependencyof the writ petition. lA NO: 2 OF 2024 Petition under section 151 cPC praying that in the circumstances stated in theaffidavitfiledinsupportofthepetition,theHighCourtmaybepleasedtostay theAnalysisReportconductedinJune,2024includingalltheConsequential actions / further proceedings, pending disposal of the present Writ Petition' IAN O:3 OF 2024 Between: FoodCoroorationoflndia,Havingitsregionalofficeat3rdFloor,HACABhavan' bi[i.tiFol"i norl, ruailpattv- sbo oo+Jretansana Rep bv its' Director ...PETITIONERS/RESPONDENT No'2 AND

1. Annaouma lndustries, Kalvacherla (V), Ramagiri (M), Peddapally- 5o5 212' Telarigana Rep. by its Partner Koleti Satyanarayana 26

2. Koleti Satyanarayana, S/o. Annapuma lndustries Rl/o Nagar -505 172, febngana Nagabhushanam , Age. 48 years, Occ. Partner of 4-3-2151518,11 , Bhumnagar, Peddapalle, Karim ...RESPONDENTS/PETITIONERS 3. Union of lndia, Rep. by its Principal Secretary, Ministry of Consumer Affairs, Food and Public Distribution

4. Telangana State Civil Supplies Corporation Limited, Having its registered office at 6-3-655/'llA, Block-B, Civil Supplies Bhavan, Somajiguda, Hyderabad-500082 Rep. by its Vice Chairman and Managing Director.

5. Warehouse Manager, Telangana State Warehousing Corporation PEG Karimanagar ...RESPONDENTS/RESPONDENTS 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 vacate the interim order dated 23-07-2024 in WP No. 19458 of 2024 and dismiss the above referred Writ Petition. lA NO: 4 OF 2024 Between: Union of lndia, Rep. by its Principal Secretary, Ministry of Consumer Affairs, Food and Public Distribution AND 1 2 Annapurna lndustries, Kalvacherla (V), Ramagiri (M), Peddapally- 505 212, Telangana Rep. by its Partner Koleti Satyanarayana Koleti Satyanarayana, S/o. Nagabhushanam , Age. 48 years, Occ. Partner of Annapuma lndustries No. 4-3-21515/B/'l , Bhumnagar, Peddapalle, Karim Nagar -505 172, Telangana ...PETITIONERS/R-1 ...RESPONDENTS/PETITIONERS rporation of lndia, Having its regional office at 3rd Floor, HACA Public Gardens Road, Nampally- 500 004, Telangana Rep by its.

3. Food Co Bhavan, Director

4. Telangana State Civil Supplies Corporation Limited, Having its registered office at 6-3-655/1/A, Block-B, Civil Supplies Bhavan, Somajiguda, Hyderabad-500082 Rep. by its Vice Chairman and Managing Director.

5. Warehouse Karimanagar Manager, Telangana State Warehousing Corporation PEG ...RESPONDENTS/RESPONDENTS 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 vacate the interim order granted by this Hon'ble Court in lA No.1i2024 in WP No. 1954812024 dated 23.07.2024 and dismiss the writ petition in the interest of justice. 27 Counsel for the Petitioners: SRI PASHAM MOHITH l"'"""'ro*heResponden'lNoli*ttd$litffi-ft E,,'fut Counsel forthe Respondent No.2: SRI DOMINIC FERNANDES, SC FOR FCI Counsel forthe Respondent No.3 : SRI T.P.ACHARYA, SC FOR TSCSC Counsel for the Respondent No.4 : SRI A.PHANI BHUSHAN, SC FOR TSWC W.P.No.19549 OF 2024 Between: 1 M/s. Ramaiah lndustries, Having its office at Poosala (V) (M), Peddapalli- 505 185, Telangana Rep. by its Partner Samudrala Ra

2. Samudrala Occ. Managin Gandhinagar Ramaiah, S/o. Samudrala Shankaraiah, o Partner of M/s. Ramaiah lndustries Fi./o. "Sulthanabad, Peddapalli- 505 185, Telangana Sultanabad Age. 70 years H. No. 3-280/4, AND ...PETITIONERS 1 Union of lndia, Rep. by its Principal Secretary, Ministry of Consumer Affairs, Food and Public Distribution Food Corporation of lndia, Having its regional office at 3rd Floor, HACA Bhavan, Public Gardens Road, Nampallyj5oo o0+, Telangana Rep by its. Director Telangana State Civil Supplies Corporation Limited, Having its registered office- at 6-3-655i1lA, Biock-B, Civil Supplies Bhavan, Somajiguda, Hyderabad-500082 Rep. by its Vice Chairman and Managing Director. Warehouse Manager, Telangana State Warehousing Corporation PEG Karimanagar 2 3 4 Petition under Article 226 ol the Constitution of lndia praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed therewith, the High Court may be pleased to issue an appropriate writ, order or direction, more particularly one in ...RESPONDENTS 28 the nature of writ of Mandamus (i) declaring the actions of the Respondents in refecting the delivery of FRK rice made by the Petitioners for crop Year 2O23-24 as being illegal, arbitrary, unjust, apart from being unconstitutional and contrary to doctrine of legitimate expectation and consequently set aside the same and (ii) consequently set aside the inspection conducted by the 1st Respondent whereby the .1 st Respondent sought to reject the LoTs of ACK s submitted by the Petitioners and all the consequential actions therein, (iii) to further set aside the communication dated 12.07.2024 issued by the 4th Respondent thereby communicating the rejection to the Petitioners as being illegal, arbitrary, unjust, apart from being unconstitutional and contrary to doctrine of legitimate expectation and consequently set aside the same and consequently direct the 2nd Respondent to accept the future deliveries of Rice by the Petitioner to the 2nd Respondent without any reference to the alleged rejection communicated vide 12.07.2024 lA NO: 2 OF 2024 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 stay the Analysis Report conducted in June, 2024 including all the consequential actions further proceedings, pending disposal of the present Writ Petition' lA NO: 1 OF 2024 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 accept the FRK rice being delivered by the Petitioner during the crop years 2023-2024 including all the future deliveries without reference to the alteged rejection of the 2nd Respondent, communicated by the 4th Respondent vide Communication daled 12.07.2024 during the pendency of the writ petition. lA NO: 3 OF 2024 Between: Food Corporation of lndia, Having its regional office-at 3rd Floor, HACA Bhavan, Public Gaidens Road, Nampally- 5b0 004, Telangana Rep by its. Director 29 ..,PETITIONERS/R.2 AND 1 M/s. Ramaiah lndustries, Having its office at Poosala (v) (t\D' Sultanabad i;!"njoiiiriii'sijs'ie6, i"r-ans'trii Rep. ov its partner Samudrala Ramaiah Samudrala Ramaiah, S/o. Samudrala Strankaraifl;.1-r:",u"1%-/t%1!: OiC.frlinrging Partner of M/s. Ramaiah lndus-tries G;;dhi.;d;"sulthanabad, Peddapalli- 505 1 85, Telangana 2 2 ...RESPONDENTS/PETITIONERS Union of lndia, Rep. by its Principal Secretary' Ministry of Consumer Affairs' Food and Public Dlstribution 4 Telanoana state civil supplies corporation Limited, Having its registered - ;ffi;;'ii 6-5l6siriiir,--6iocrce, - bwit supplies Bhavan' Somajisuda' iiv[Jtuo?o-soooe2 nep uy iis vice Chairman bhd Managing Director'

5. Warehouse Manager, Karimanagar Telangana State Warehousing Corporation PEG ...RESPONDENTS/RESPONDENTS 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 vacate the interim order dated '13-07-2024 in WP No 19549 of 2024;lnd dismiss the above referred Writ Petition- IA NO: 40F 2024 Between: Union of lndia, ReP by its Principal Secretary, Ministry of Consumer Affairs' Food and Public Distribution ...PETITIONERS/R.1 AND

1. 2 3 4 M/s. Ramaiah lndustries, Having its office-at Poosala (v) (t\0' sultanabad Flto"iiriii'sijs'i asl i.r-i"gr;J Rep. uv its Partner Samudrala Ramaiah Samudrala Ramaiah, S/o. Samudrala .Shankaraiah' Aqe TO years 6l'Jltii"itt"s"ijil;;? or'lr,v.lHi-.ian rnoustrtes Rr/o. H-. No. 3-280/4, 6;;ihi;;d;iBulthanabad, Peddapalli- 505 185' Telansana ...RESPONDENTS/PETITIONERS jR:l[f ?l Efl :i"::'ff[fi X%,:J"'lS'ft Director Telanoana State civil supplies corporation Limited, Having its registered - bi'il Supplies. Bhavan' somajisuda' ;F;"%i" 6-5:osviin,--6i,il?e' ili'iE|., riio -5060-8r'#i. bt iiJ ViA chairman b hd Ma nasi ns Di recto r' "5o1"ltili',fj3'{i3''3T:?"?j"3:'"

5. Warehouse Manager, Karimanagar Telangana State Warehousing Corporation PEG ...RESPONOENTS/RESPONDENTS 30 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 vacate the interim order granted by this Hon'ble Court in lA No.112024 in WP No. 1954912024 dated 23.07.2024 and dismiss the writ petition in the interest of justice. Counsel for the Petitioners: SRI PASHAM MOHITH ro*he Responden'[ No 1 |"'"""' i*ttd$Httr'ffiEifuf Counsel for the Respondent No.2: SRI DOMINIC FERNANDES, SC FOR FCI Counsel for the Respondent No.3 : SRI T.P.ACHARYA, SC FOR TSCSC Counsel for the Respondent No.4 : SRI A.PHANI BHUSHAN, SC FOR TSWC W.P.No.19555 OF 2024 Between:

1. Mohankrishna lndustries, Katnapally (V), Sulthanabad (M), Peddapalli- 505 525, Telangana Rep. by its Managing Partner Komuravelli Ramulu

2. Komuravelli Ramulu, S/o. Komuravelli Vishwanatham, Age. 70 years Occ.Partner of Mohankrishna lndustries Rio. House No. 3-145, Main Road, Sultanabad Peddapalli- 505 185, Telangana ...PETITIONERS AND

1. Union of lndia, Rep. by its Principal Secretary, Ministry of Consumer Affairs, Food and Public Distribution 2. Food Corporation of lndia, Havi Bhavan, Public Gardens Road, Director ng its regional office at 3rd Floor, HACA Nampally- 500 004, Telangana Rep by its

3. Te-langana State Civil Supplies Corporation Limited, Having its registered gffige a! 6-3-655/1/A, Block-B, Civil Supplies Bhavan, Som-ajiguda, Hyderabad-500082, Rep. by its Vice Chairman and Managing Director. 4. Warehouse [\/anager, Telangana State Warehousing Corporation, PEG Karimanagar Petition under Article 226 ot lhe Constitution of lndia praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed therewith, the High Court may be ...RESPONDENTS 3l pleased to issue an appropriate writ, order or direction, more particularly one in the nature of writ of Mandamus (i) declaring the actions of the Respondents in refecting the delivery of FRK rice made by the Petitioners for Crop Year 2023-24 as being illegal, arbitrary, un.just, apart from being unconstitutional and contrary to doctrine of legitimate expectation and consequently set aside the same and (ii) consequently set aside the inspection conducted by the 1 Respondent whereby the lSt Respondent sought to reject the LOTs of ACK s submitted by the Petitioners and all the consequential actions therein, (iii) to further set aside the communication dated 12.O7.2024 issued by the 4th Respondent thereby communicating the rejection to the Petitioners as being illegal, arbitrary, unjust, apart from being u nconstitutional and contrary to doctrine of legitimate expectation and consequently set aside the same and consequently direct the 2nd Respondent to accept the future deliveries of Rice by the Petitioner to the 2nd Respondent without any reference to the alleged rejection communicated vide 12.07.2024. lA NO: 1 OF 2024 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 accept the FRK rice being delivered by the Petitioner during the crop years 2023-2024 including all the future deliveries without reference to the alleged rejection of the 2nd Respondent, communicated by the 4th Respondent vide Communication daled 12.07.2024 during the pendency of the writ petition. lA NO: 3 OF 2024 Between:

1. Food Corporation of lndia, Having its regional office at 3rd Floor, HACA Bhavan, Public Gardens Road, N2mpally- 500 004, Telangana Rep by its Director PETITIONERS/R.2&3 AND 1 Mohankrishna lndustries, Katnapally (V), Sulthanabad (f\4), Peddapalli- 505 525, Telangana Rep. by its Managing Partner Komuravelli Ramulu

2. Komuravelli Ramulu, S/o. Komuravelli Vishwanatham, Age 70 years Occ.Partner of Mohankrishna lndustries Rio. House No. 3- 145, Main Road, Sultanabad Peddapalli- 505 185, Telangana ...RESPoNDENTS/PETITIoNERS 32

3. Union of Jndia, Rer rooo ano plr6ii;iln#,'0Jt","?'''cipal secretary, Ministry of consumerAffairs,

4. T_e_langana State Ci rru:,}i:;uir#l::;"f,-i,,,,". i[*,###q"*fr b*,,i..i,* flrffi:"rff"Manager, Telangana state warehousing corporation, pEG u ...RESPoNDENTS/RESPoNDENTS petition under secti the arr da v t r eo n s u p poo,l :: H T:J::: :,]il,:""::il1il::"::::j vacate the interim order dated 23-07 -2024 in wp *o. ,nruu of 2O24and dismiss the above referred Writ petition. .'; IANo:4OF 2024 Between: y,SErlJ','J33,ft",i;jJ its Principar secretary, Ministry or consumer Afrairs, Food AND

1. 2 y:iT}i:ipt'?.iXl,[i]iii:}?#UAY,if"i,,[1xi:elf $iti':h?l""iH[irs"i[",#i+",,Iffi y.I"ffi ,.,x?i,]p,iss,f ,H#,.,.apari.s05 ...PETITIONERS/R.1

3. Food Co Bhavan. Director ffi nx"i#sr?ffiy,ft%h::fl=l;,"JsHild;[%r;R:=^.

4. T-e_langana State Cir ft f,tli**ift"#-{iiffi ii,tiifl lf*,###.}*ft bb*{::".", flrffi:"r:tn"rManager, Telangana state warehousing corporation, pEG t petition under Sectir the aff davt f ed n ;o;::[Til::::,.:i;,::il[Jffi:J::"j.': vacate the interim order granted by this Hon,bre cor.t in rA No.1/2024in wp No. "'RESP.NDENT'/RESP.NDENT. 1g555t2024 daled 23.07.2024 and dismiss the writ petition in the interest of justice. JJ Counsel for the Petitioners: SRI PASHAM MOHITH Counsel for the ResPondent No.1 : SRI A.S.VASUDEVAN & SRI K.L.N.RAGHAVENDRA REDDY' Assisting SRI B.NARASIMHA SHARMA ADDL.SOLICITOR GENERAL OF INDIA Counsel for the Respondent No.2: SRI DOMINIC FERNANDES' SC FOR FCI Counsel for the Respondent No.3 : SRI T'P'ACHARYA, SC FOR TSCSC Counsel for the Respondent No.4 : SRI A'PHANI BHUSHAN' SC FOR TSWC w.P .No.19614 OF 2024 Between: 34 1 M/s. Sapthagiri Rice lndustries, Namapur (V), Mustlbad(M), Rajanna Siricilla- 505404; Telingana Rep. by its Partner Sandupatla Rajireddy Sanduoatla Raiireddv. S/o. Naravan Reddy, Age 42 yearc, Occ Partner of lndu'stries R/o. H. No. 10-84' Yellareddipet, Kishandaspet, Sapthdgiri Ric€; Karimnagar, Telangana ..PETITIONER Union of lndia, Rep by its Principal Secretary, Ministry of Consumer Affairs, Food and Public Distribution Food Corporation of lndia, Having its regional off]c.e at 3rd Floor, HACA Bhavan, Public Gardens Road, Nampally- 500 004, Telangana Rep by its. Director Food Corporation of lndia, Nagnur, Karimnagar-Rep by its Manager (QC) Neeraja Complex Towards Ambedkar Stadium Mukarampura, Karimnagar Telangana Telanoana State Civil Supplies Corporation Limited' Having its registered -at 6-3-655/1/A, etobk-B, Civil supplies Bhavan, Somajiguda, office Hyderabad-500082 Rep. by its Vice Chalrman and Managing Director. 2 AND 1 2 3 4 ...RESPONDENTS Petition under Article 226 o( lhe Constitution of lndia praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed therewith, the High Court may be pleased to issue an appropriate writ, order or direction more particularly one in the nature of writ of Mandamus (i)declaring the actions of the Respondents in freezing the stacks of FRK rice delivered by the Petitioners for crop Yeat 2023-24 as being illegal, arbitrary, unlust, apart from being unconstitutional and contrary to doctrine of legitimate expectation and consequently set aside the communication dated 10.07.2024 and 20.O7.2024 issued by 3rd Respondent thereby directing freezing of stacks delivered by the Petitioner. (ii)declaring the subsequent actions of the Respondents in not accepting FRK rice being delivered by the Petitioners for Crop Year 2023-24 as being illegal, arbitrary, uniust apart from being unconstitutional and contrary to doctrine of legitimate expectation and consequently direct the Respondents to accept the future deliveries of FRK Rice by the Petitioner to the Respondents (iii)to further set aside the inspection conducted by the 'l st Respondent whereby the '1st Respondent sought to reject the LOTs of ACK's submitted by the Petitioners and all the consequential actions therein (iv)to further set aside the communication daled 20.o7.2024 issued by the 3rd Respondent thereby communicating about the freezing of the stocks to the Petitioners as being illegal, arbitrary, unjust, apart from being u nconstitutional and contrary to doctrine of legitimate expectation and consequently set aside the 35 lA NO: 2 OF 2024 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 stay the Analysis Report conducted on 12.06.2024 including all the consequential actions / further proceedings, pending disposal of the present Writ Petition. lA NO: 1 OF 2024 Petition under Section 'l 51 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 accept the FRK rice being delivered by the Petitioner during the crop years 2023-2024 including all the future deliveries without reference to the alleged rejection of the 'l st Respondent during the pendency of the writ petition. lA NO: 3 OF 2024 Between:

1. Food Corporation of lndia, Having its regional office at 3rd Floor, HACA Bhavan, Public Gardens Road, Nampally- 500 004, Telangana Rep by its. Director

2. Food Corporation of lndia, Nagnur, Karimnagar Rep by its lVlanager (QC) Neeraja Complex Towards Ambedkar Stadium Mukarampura, Karimnagar Telangana ...PETITIONERYR.2&3 AND 1 2 3 M/s. Sapthagiri Rice Industries, Namapur (V), Mustabad(M), Rajanna Siricilla- 505404, Telangana Rep. by its Partner Sandupatla Rajireddy Sandupatla Rajireddy, S/o. Narayan Reddy, Age 42 yearc, Occ Partner of Sapthagiri Rice lndustries Rl/o. H. No. 10-84, Yellareddipet, Kishandaspet, Karimnagar, Telangana Union of lndia, Rep by its Principal Secretary, Ministry of Consumer Affairs, Food and Public Distribution ...RESPONDENTS/PETITIONER 36

4. Telangana State Civil Supplies Corporation Limited, Having.its registered officeLt 6-3-655/1/A, atobk-e, Civil supplies Bhavan, Somajiguda, Hyderabad-500082 Rep. by its Vice Chairman and Managing Director. ...RESPONDENTS/RESPONDENTS 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 vacate the interim order dated 23-07 -2024 in WP No. 19614 0f 2024 and dismiss the above referred Writ Petition. lA NO: 4 OF 2024 Between:

1. Union of lndia, Rep by its Principal Secretary, Ministry of Consumer Affairs, Food and Public Distribution ...PETITIONER/R-1 AND 1 2 2 3 4 M/s. Sapthagiri Rice lndustries, Namapur (V), Mustabad(M), Rajanna Siricilla- 505404; Telangana Rep. by its Partner Sandupatla Rajireddy Sandupatla Rajireddy, S/o. Narayan Reddy, Age 42 yearc, Occ Partner of Sapthagiri Ricei lndJstries Rl/o. H. No. 10-84, Yellareddipet, Kishandaspet, Karimnagar, Telangana ...RESPONDENTS/PETITIONER Food Corporation of lndia, Having its regional office at 3rd Floor, HACA Bhavan, Public Gardens Road, Nhmpally- 500 004, Telangana Rep by its. Director Food Corporation of lndia, Nagnur, Karimnagar Rep by its Manager (QC) Neeraja Complex Towards Ambedkar Stadium [Vlukarampura, Karimnagar Telangana Telangana State Civil Supplies Corporation Limited, Having its registered office at 6-3-655/1/A, Block-B, Civil Supplies Bhavan, Somajiguda, Hyderabad-500082 Rep. by its Vice Chairman and Managing Director. ...RESPONOENTS/RESPONDENTS 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 vacate the interim order granted by this Hon'ble Court in lA No.1l2O24 in WP No. 1961412024 daled 23.07.2O24 and dismiss the writ petition in the interest of justice. Counsel for the Petitioners: SRI PASHAM MOHITH 37 Counsel for the Respondent No.1 : SRI A.S.VASUDEVAN & SRI K.L.N.RAGHAVENDRA REDDY, Assisting SRI B.NARASIMHA SHARMA ADDL.SOLICITOR GENERAL OF INDIA Counsel for the Respondent No.2&3: SRI DOMINIC FERNANDES, SC FOR FCI Counsel for the Respondent No.3 : SRI T.P.ACHARYA, SC FOR TSCSC W.P.No.19621 OF 2024 Between:

1. M/s. Venkata Sai Rice lndustries, Choopadandi V and M, Karimnagar- 5054'15, Telangana Rep. by its Partner Bommena Sandhya

2. Bommena Sandhya, Wo. Gopal Rao , Age.47 years, Occ.Partner of M/s. Venkata Sai Ricti lndustries No.7-1-69012, Mankammathota, Karimnagar, Telangana-50500.1 ...PETITIONERS AND 1 Union of lndia, Rep. by its Principal Secretary, Ministry of Consumer Affairs, Food and Public Distribution 2 3 4 Food Corporation of lndia, Having its regional office at 3rd Floor, HACA Bhavan, Public Gardens Road, N-ampally- 500 004, Telangana Rep by its. Director Food Corporation of lndia Nagnur, Karimnagar Rep by its Mana.ger (QC) Neeraja Complex Towards Ambedkar Stadium Mukarampura, Karimnagar Telangana Telangana State Civil Supplies Corporation Limited, Having its registered officeit 6-3-655/1/A, ebbk-s, Civil supplies Bhavan, Sombjiguda, Hyderabad-500082 Rep. by its Vice Chairman and Managing Director. ...RESPONDENTS Petition under Article 226 ot the Constitution of lndia praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed therewith, the High Court may be pleased to issue an appropriate writ, order or direction, more particularly one in the nature of writ of Mandamus. (i) declaring the actions of the Respondents in freezing the stacks of FRK rice delivered by the Petitioners for crop Year 2023-24 as being illegal, arbitrary, unjust, apart from being unco nstitutional and contrary to doctrine of legitimate expectation and consequently set aside the communication dated .10.07.2o24 and 20.O7.2024 issued by 3rd Respondent thereby directing freezing of stacks delivered by the Petitioner. (ii) declaring the subsequent actions of the Respondents in not accepting FRK rice being delivered by the Petitioners for Crop Year 2O23-24 as being illegal, arbitrary, unjust, apart from being 38 unconstitutionaI and contrary to doctrine of legitimate expectation and consequently direct the Respondents.to accept the future deliveries of FRK Rice by the Petitioner to the Respondents (iii) to further set aside the inspection conducted by the 1st Respondent whereby the 1st Respondent sought to reject the LOTs of ACK's submitted by the Petitioners and all the consequential actions therein. (i) to further set aside the communication dated 20.07.2024 issued by the 3rd Respondent thereby communicating about the freezing of the stocks, to the Petitioners as being illegal, arbitrary, unjust, apart from being u nco nstitutional and contrary to doctrine of legitimate expectation and consequently set aside the same. lA NO: 2 OF 2024 Petition under Section 15'1 CPC praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed in support of the petition, the High Court may be pleased to stay the Analysis Report conducted on 12.06.2024 including all the consequential actions / further proceedings, pending disposal of the present Writ Petition. lA NO: 1 OF 2024 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 accept the FRK rice being delivered by the Petitioner during the crop years 2023-2024 including all the future deliveries without reference to the alleged rejection of the 1st Respondent during the pendency of the writ petition. 1A NO: 3 OF 2024 Between:

1. Food Corporation of lndia, Having its regional office at 3rd Floor, HACA Bhavan, Public Gardens Road, Nampally- 500 004, Telangana Rep by its. Director

2. Food Corporation of lndia Nagnur, Karimnagar Rep by its Manager (QC) Neeraja Complex Towards Ambedkar Stadium Mukar-ampura, K-arininagjar Telangana ...PETITIONERS/R-2&3 39 AND 2 3 4 1 M/s. Venkata Sai Rice lndustries, Choopadandi V and M, Karimnagar- 505415, Telangana Rep. by its Partner Bommena Sandhya Bommena Sandhya, Wo. Gopal Rao , Age.47 years, Occ.Partner of M/s. Venkata Sai Ricri lndustries R/o.7-1-690/2, Mankammathota, Karimnagar, Telangana-505001 ...RESPONDENTS/PETITIONERS Union of lndia, Rep. by its Principal Secretary, Ministry of Consumer Affairs, Food and Public Distribution Telangana State Civil Supplies Corporation Limited, Having ils registered -at 6-3-655/1/A, Block-B, Civil Supplies Bhavan, Somajiguda, office Hyderabad-500082 Rep. by its Vice Chairman and Managing Director. ...RESPONDENTS/RESPONDENTS 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 vacate the interim order dated 23-07-2024 inWP No. 19621 of 2024 and dismiss the above referred Writ Petition. lA NO: 4 OF 2024 Between:

1. Union of lndia, Rep. by its Principal Secretary, Ministry of Consumer Affairs, Food and Public Distribution ...PETITIONER/R.1 AND 1 2 3 4 5 M/s. Venkata Sai Rice lndustries, Choopadandi V and M, Karimnagar- 505415, Telangana Rep. by its Partner Bommena Sandhya Bommena Sandhva, Wo. Gopal Rao , Age.47 years, Occ.Partner of M/s. Venkata Sai Ricti lndustries'No.7-1-69012, Mankammathota' Karimnagar, Telangana-505001 ...RESPONDENTS/PETITIONERS Food Comoration of lndia, Having its regional office at 3rd Floor, HACA Bhavan, Public Gardens Road, Nampally- 500 004, Telangana Rep by its. Director Food Corporation of lndia Nagnur, Karimnagar Rep by its Manager (QC) Neeraja Complex Towards Ambedkar Stadium Mukarampura, Karimnagar Telangana Telanoana State Civil Supolies Corporation Limited, Having its registered 6-3-655/1 /A, etobk-B, Civil'supplies Bhavan, Somajiguda, office Hyderabad-500082 Rep. by its Vice Chairman and Managing Director. -at ...RESPONDENTS 40 Petition under Section 151 CPC praying that in the circumstances stated in theaffidavitfiledinsupportofthepetition,theHighCourtmaybepleasedto vacate the interim order granted by this Hon'ble Court in lA No 1/2024 in WP No' 1g621t2o24da|ed23'oT.2o24anddismissthewritpetitionintheinterestof justice Counsel for the Petitioners: SRI PASHAM MOHITH counser ror the Respondent No'1 iiitffutliltnxtru,=*, ADOL.SOLICITOR GENERAL OF INDIA Counsel for the Respondent No'2&3: SRI DOMINIC FERNANDES' SC FOR FCI Counsel for the Respondent No'3 : SRI T'P'ACHARYA' SC FOR TSCSC W.P.No.1 9630 oF 2024 Between: - ;: ys*a;1T"ll3;:}lfR"[t]ilf[,"JYJr,3,?li]?X5?T,f,1,(M)' 2. Pariialha Pathuri, W/o. Kishan Reddy, Age. 46 vears, occ. Partner of VavLoutra lndustrie;"ivo.o:ilir6io,-kotnipaltv (V)' Gambhiraopet (M)' Raianna Siricilla- 505304, Telangana Raianna siricirra. ...PETITIONERS AND 1 2 3 4 Union of lndia, Rep. by its Principal Secretary' Ministry of Consumer Affairs' Food and Public Distribution Food Corporation of lndia, Having its regional ffice at 3rd Floor' HACA bffi;:ffbil d;;d il;?, r'liriipatii- 5oo 004, relansana Rep bv its' Director Food corporation of lndia, Nagnur, Karimn_agar.Rep by its Manager (QC) fu::;rHi;ffi iEi' ib*JiJi A.io"okai stao i tim Mu karim pu ra, Kari m nas a r Telangana Telanqana State Civil Supplies Corporation Limited" Having.its registered ;;i;;"ri'6:3"-6:', r rri, u"[[-e, civii'su pplies Bhavan' som.a jisud a' iiv'iErtro:s"o"oitdi h;p. bin's Vice chiirman and Manasins Director' . ...RESPONDENTS Petition under Article 226 ol the Constitution of lndia praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed therewith' the High Court may be pleased to issue an appropriate writ, order or direction more particularly one in the nature of writ of Mandamus. (i)declaring the actions of the Respondents in 4l freezingthestacks'ofFRKricedeliveredbythePetitionersforCropYear2023-24 as being illegal, arbitrary, uniust' apart from being unconstitutional and contrary to doctrine of legitimate expectation and consequently set aside the communication dated 10.07.2 O24 and 20'07'2024 issued by 3rd Respondent thereby directing freezing of stacks delivered by the Petitioner' (ii)declaring the subsequent actions of the Respondents in not accepting FRK rice being delivered by the Petitioners for Crop Yeat 2023-24 as being illegal' arbitrary' uniust' apart from being unc<jnstitutional and contrary to doctrine of legitimate expectation and consequently direct the Respondents to accept the future deliveries of FRK Rice by the Petitioner to the Respondents (iii)to further set aside the inspection conducted by the 1st Respondent whereby the 1st Respondent sought to reiect therein. (iv)to further set aside the communication dated 20 '07 2024 issued by the 3rd Respondent thereby communicating about the freezing of the stocks to the Petitioners as being illegal, arbitrary' unjust' apart from being unconstitutional and contrary to doctrine of legitimate expectation and consequently set aside the theLoTsofACKssubmittedbythePetitionersandalltheconsequentialactions IA NO :1OF 2024 petition under section 151 cpc praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit fired in support of the petition, the High court may be pleased to direct the Respondents to accept the FRK rice being delivered by the Petitioner during the crop years 2023-2024 including all the future deliveries without reference to the alleged rejection of the 1st Respondent during the pendency of the writ Petition. IA NO: 2 oF 2024 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 stay the Analysis Report conducted on 12 06'2024 including all the consequential actions / further proceedings, pending disposar of the present writ Petition' lA NO: 3 OF 2024 4Z Between: '1 . Food Corporation of lndia, Having its regional office at 3rd Floor, HACA Bhavan, Public Gardens Road, Nampally- 500 004, Telangana Rep by its. Director

2. Food Corporation of lndia, Nagnur, Karimnagar Rep by its Manager (QC) Neeraja Complex Towards Ambedkar Stadium Mukarampura, Karimnagar Telangana ...PETITIONERS/R-2&3 AND 1 Vayuputra lndustries, Kothapally (V), Gambhiraopet (M), Rajanna Siricilla- 505304, Telangana Rep. by its Partner Parijatha Pathuri Parijatha Pathuri, W/o. Kishan Reddy, Age. 46 years, Occ. Partner of Vayuputra lndustries R/o.6-1 1/16/D, Kothapally (V), Gambhiraopet (M), Rajanna Siricilla- 505304, Telangana 2 ...RESPONDENTS/PETITIONERS

3. Union of lndia, Rep. by its Principal Secretary, Ministry of Consumer Affairs, Food and Public Distribution

4. Telangana State Civil Supplies Corporation Limited,, Having its registered office at 6-3-655/1/A, Block-B, Civil Supplies Bhavan, Somajiguda, Hyderabad-500082 Rep. by its Vice Chairman and Managing Director. ...RESPONDENTS/RESPONOENTS 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 vacate the interim order daled 2310712024 in W.P.No. 19630 of 2024 and dismiss the above referred Writ Petition. lA NO: 4 OF 2024 Between: Union of lndia, Rep. by its Principal Secretary, Ministry of Consumer Affairs, Food and Public Distribution AND

1. Vayuputra lndustries, Kothapally (V), Gambhiraopet (M), Rajanna Siricilla- 505304, Telangana Rep. by its Partner Parijatha Pathuri

2. Parijatha Pathuri, Wio. Kishan Reddy, Age. 46 Vayuputra lndustries R/o.6-1'l/16/D, Kothapally Rajanna Siricilla- 505304, Telangana years, Occ. Partner of (V), Gambhiraopet (M), ...PETITIONERS/R-1 ...RESPONDE NTS/PETITIONERS 43 4 rDoration of lndia, Having its regional office at 3rd Floor, HACA Frof i" eaia"ns Road, N-ampali-y- 500 004, Telangana Rep by its

3. Food Co Bhavan, Director Food Corporation of lndia, Nagnur, Karimnagar Rep by its Manager (QC) Neeraja Complex Toward! Ambedkar Stadium [\Iukarampura' Karimnagar Telangana Telanoana State Civil Supplies Corporation Limited,, Having its registered omce"ri o-e-oss/1/A, Bbbk-B, civil supplies Bhavan, somajiguda, ftyOeraOaO-SOOOB2 Rep. by its Vice Chairman and Managing Director' 5 ...RESPONDENTS/RESPONDENTS 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 vacate the interim order granted by this Hon'ble court in lA No.1/2024 in WP No- 1g63)t2024 dated 23.07.2024 and dismiss the writ petition in the interest of justice. Counsel for the Petitioners: SRI PASHAM MOHITH Gounsel for the ResPondent No.1 : SRI A.S.VASUDEVAN & SRI K.L.N.RAGHAVENDRA REDDY, Assisting SRI B.NARASIMHA SHARMA ADDL.SOLTCITOR GENERAL OF INDIA CounselfortheRespondentNo.2&3:SRIDoMINICFERNANDES,ScFoRFcI Counsel for the Respondent No.3 : SRI T.P.ACHARYA, SC FOR TSCSC W.P.N o.19723 OF 2024 Between: M/s. sri Dhanalaxmi lndustries, Sulthanabad Proper and Mandal, Peddapalli District' [il";;.i#'b, G M;ilsins-i'irtner, Dusvala Santhosh Rao S/o' Madhava Rao' Age. 34 Years. ...PETITIONER AND

1. The State of Telangana, represented by its Principal Secreta Consumer Affairs, Food and Civil Supplies Department' Secretanal Hyderabad. Build ings,

2. The Collector (CS), Peddapalli District, Peddapalli' 3 The Telanoana State Civil Supplies Corporation, rep Ctriirman 5no frlinaging Directoi, having.its. registered eioik B, cirii supplie-s Biavan, somajigulda, Hyderabad resented by its Vice office at 6-3-655/1/A, 44

4. The District Manager, Telangana State Civil Supplies Corporation, Peddapalli District, Peddapalli.

5. Food Corporation of lndia, represented by its Director, having its office at 3rd Floor, HACA Bhavan, Public Gardens Road, Nampally, Hyderabad.

6. The Divisional Manager, Food Corporation of lndia, Divisional Office, Karimnagar, District Karimnagar.

7. The Warehouse Manager, Telangana State Warehousing Corporation, PEG- Karimnagar' Karimnagar District ...RES'.NDENTS Petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of lndia praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed therewith, the High Cou( may be pleased to issue an order or direction more particularly one in the nature of writ of mandamus or any other appropriate writ declaring the action of the respondent No. 7 in issuing Lr. No. TSWC/PEG-KNRyRD (S and R) BRL Stackl2O24-25, dated 12-07-2024, to the petitioner rice mill directing to replace the stocks of rice which were delivered by them between Og-05-2O24 to 17-05-2024 till the same is replaced their new consignments of stock of rice will not be accepted, is nothing but arbitrary, illegal, null and void and violative of principles of natural justice and also violative of Articles 14, 19 and 2'1 of the Constitution of India. Consequently set aside the said letter dated 12-07-2024, thereby direct the respondent authorities No's. 5 to 7 to receive fresh consignment of the stocks of rice after analyzing and found in accordance with their specifications. !A NO: 1 OF 2024 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 letter No. TSWC/PEG-KNRyRD (S and R) BRL StacW2O24-25, issued by the respondent No. 7, thereby direct the respondent No's. 5 to 7 authorities to receive the new consignment of stock of rice from the petitioner rice mill, which is found on analysis as per their specifications. lA NO: 2 OF 2024 Between:

1. The Divisional Manager, Food Karimnagar, District Karimnagar. Corporation of lndia, Divisional Office,

2. The Warehouse Manager, Telangana State Warehousing Corporation, PEG- Karimnagar, Karimnagar District. 45 ...PETITIONERS/R.5&6 AND 1 M/s. Sri Dhanalaxmi lndustries, Sulthanabad Proper and Mandal, Pedda District, represented by its Managing Partner, Dugyala Santhosh Rao Madhava Rao, Age. 34 Years. Sio. ...RESPONDENTS/PETITIONER 2..The State of Telangana, represented by its Principal Secretary to the Consumer Affairs, Food and Civil Supplies Department, Secretariat Buildings, Hyderabad.

3. The Collector (CS), Peddapalli District, Peddapalli. 4. The Telangana State Civil Supplies Corporation, represented by its Vice Chairman and Managing Director, having its registered office at 6-3-655/1/A, Block B, Civil Supplies Bhavan, Somajiguda, Hyderabad.

5. The District Manager, Telangana State Civil Supplies Corporation, Peddapalli District, Peddapalli.

6. Food Corporation of lndia, represented by its Director, having its office at 3rd Floor, HACA Bhavan, Public Gardens Road, Nampally, Hyderabad. ...RESPONDENTS/RESPONDENTS 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 vacate the interim order dated 24-07 -2024 inWP No. 19723 of 2024 and dismiss the above referred Writ Petition. Counsel for the Petitioners : SRI K.VENUMADHAV Counsel for the Respondents No.1&2: GP FOR CIVIL SUPPLIES Counsel for the Respondent No.3 : SRI T.P.ACHARYA, SC FOR TSCSC Counsel for the Respondent No.5&6: SRI DOMINIC FERNANDES, SC FOR FCI Counsel for the Respondent No.4 : SRI A.PHANI BHUSHAN, SC FOR TSWC W.P.No.19946 OF 2024 Between: M/s. Varalaxmi Agro lndustries, lndaram Village, Jaipur Mandal, Mancherial District, represented by its Managing Partner, G. Ravinder Rao S/o. Laxman Rao, Age.54 Years. ,..PETITIONER 46 AND 1 The State of Telangana, represented by its Principal SecretaU .to -the consumer Affairs, Food and civil supplies Department, secretarlat Bullolngs, Hyderabad. The Collector (CS), Mancherial District, Mancherial. The Telangana State Civil Supplies Corporation, rep Chairman ind Managing Directiri, having its.registered Bro;i B, Civil Supplie! B-havan, Somajigutla, Hyderabad resented by its Vice office at 6-3-655/1iA, 3 2

4. The District Manager, Telangana state civil supplies corporation, Mancheiral District, Mancherial.

5. Food corooration of lndia, represented by its Director, having its office at 3rd - Flff, HAbA ehavan, Pubiic Gardens Road, Nampally, Hyderabad' 6. The Divisional Manager, Food corporation of lndia, Divisional office, Karimnagar, District Karimnagar

7. The District Manager, Food Corporation of lndia, Karimnagar Proper and District. ...RESPONDENTS Petition under Article 226 ot lhe constitution of lndia praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed therewith, the High court may be pleased to issue an order or direction more particularly one in the nature of writ of mandamus or any other appropriate writ declaring the action of the respondent No. 7 in issuing Lr. No. FCI/FSD/ MNCL/BRL/2024-25 dated 12-07-2024, to lhe petitioner's rice mill directing to replace the stocks of rice which were delivered by them between 23-04-2024 to 27 -O4-2O24 till the same is replaced their new consignments of stock of rlce will not be accepted, is nothing but arbitrary, illegal, null and void and violative of principles of natural justice and also violative of Articles 14, 19 and' 21 of the constitution of lndia. consequently set aside the said letter dated 12t07t2o24, thereby direct the respondent authorities No's. 5 to 7 to receive fresh consignment of the stocks of rice after analyzing and found in accordance with their specifications. lA NO: 1 OF 2024 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 letter No. FCI/FSD/ MNCL/BRL/2024-25 daled 12-7-2024, issued by the respondent No. 7, thereby direct the respondent No.s. 5 to 7 authorities to receive the new consignment of stock of rice from the petitioner's rice mill, which is found on analysis as per their specifications. 47 lA NO: 2 OF 2024 Between:

1. Food Corporation of lndia, represented by its Director, having its office at 3rd Floor, HACA Bhavan, Public Gardens Road, Nampally, Hyderabad.

2. The Divisional Manager, Food Corporation of lndia, Divisional 'Office, Karimnagar, District Karimnagar

3. The District Manager, Food Corporation of lndia, Karimnagar Proper and District. ...PETITIONER/R.5TO7 AND 1 2 3 4 M/s. Varalaxmi Agro lndustries, lndaram Village, Jaipur Mandal, Mancherial District, represent6d by its Managing Partner, G Ravinder Rao S/o. Laxman Rao, Age.54 Years. ...RESPONDENT/PETITIONER The State of Telangana, represented by its Principal Secretary to. the Consumer Affairs, Fo6d and Civil Supplies Department, Secretariat Buildings' Hyderabad. The Collector (CS), Mancherial District, Mancherial. The Telanqana State Civil Supplies Corporation, repre,s,ented -by Chairman 5nd Managing Directiri, having its registered office at 6-3 Block B, Civil Supplie-s Biavan, SomajiguiCa, Hyderabad. its Vice -655111A,

5. The District Manager, Telangana State Civil Supplies corporation, Mancheiral District, Mancherial. ...RESPONDENTS/RESPONDE NTS 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 vacate the interim order dated 01-08-2024 inWP No. 19946 0f 2024 and dismiss the above referred Writ Petition. Counsel for the Petitioners : SRI K.VENUMADHAV Counsel for the Respondents No.1&2 : GP FOR CIVIL SUPPLIES Counsel for the Respondents No.3&4 : SRI T.P.ACHARYA, SC FOR TSCSC counsel for the Respondent No.Sto7: SRI DOMINIC FERNANDES, SC FOR FCI 48 W.P.No.20506 OF 2024 Between: '1 . M/s. Sri Tulasi Modem Rice Mill, Kachapur (V), Julapalli (M) Peddapalli District - 505525, Telangana Being represented by its Partner Kandi Malla Reddy

2. Kandi Malla Reddy, S/o. Rajireddy, Age- 59 years, Occ- Managing Partner of M/s. Sri Tulasi lVlodem Riie Mill No. 2-74, Kachapur,Julapelly Mandalam Peddapalli District - 505525,Telanmna AND 1 2 Union of lndia, Rep. by its Principal Secretary, Ivtinistry of Consumer Affairs, Food and Public Distribution Food Corporation of lndia, Having its regional office at 3rd Floor, HACA Bhavan, Public Gardens Road, Nampally- 500 004, Telangana Rep by its. Director ...PETITIONERS

3. Telangana State Civil Supplies Corporation Limited, Having its registered office at 6-3-655i 1/A, Block-B, Civil Supplies Bhavan, Somajimada Hmierabad-500082 Rep. by its Vice Chairman and Maaarirm Director. 4. Warehouse Manager, Telangana State Warehousing Coapersion PEG Karimanagar ...RESPONDENTS Petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of lndia praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed therewith, the High Court may be pleased to issue an appropriate writ, order or direction more particularly one in the nature of writ of Mandamus- (i)declaring the actions of the Respondents in rejecting the delivery of FRK rice made by the Petitioners for Crop Year 2023-24 as being illegal, arbitrary, unjust. apart from being unco nstitutional and contrary to doctrine of legitimate expectation and consequently set aside the same and (ii)consequently set aside the inspection inspection report conducted by the 1st Respondent whereby the 1st Respondent sought to reject the LOTs of ACKs submitted by the Petitioners and all the consequential actions therein-(iii)to further set aside the communication dated 12.07.2024 issued by the 4th Respondent thereby communicating the rejection to the Petitioners as being illegal, arbitrary. unjust apart from being unconstitutiona I and contrary to doctrine of legitimate expectation and consequently set aside the same and consequently direct the 2nd Respondent to accept the future deliveries of Rice by the Petitioner rice millers to the 2nd Respondent without any reference to the alleged rejection communicated vide 12.07 .2O24. 49 lA NO: 1 OF 2024 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 accept the FRK rice being delivered by the Petitioner during the crop years 2023-2024 including all the future deliveries without reference to the alleged rejection of the 2nd Respondent, communicated by the 4th Respondent vide Communication daled 12.O7.2024 during the pendency of the writ petition. lA NO: 2 OF 2024 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 stay the Analysis Report conducted in June, 2024 including all the consequential actions / further proceedings, pending disposal of the present Writ Petition. lA NO: 3 OF 2024 Between: Food Corporation of lndia, Having its regional office at 3rd Floor, HACA Bhavan, Public Gardens Road, Nampally- 500 004, Telangana Rep by its. Director ...PETITIONERYR.2 AND 1 Mis. Sri Tulasi fVlodem Rice Mill, Kachapur (V), Julapalli (M) Pedd District - 505525, Telangana Being represented by its Partner Kandi Reddy apalli Malla

2. Kandi Malla Reddy, S/o. Rajiredd M/s. Sri Tulasi Modem Rice Mil Peddapalli District - 505525,Telanmna y, Age- 59 years, Occ- Managing Partner of I PJo. 2-74, Kachapur,Julapelly Mandalam

3. Union of lndia, Rep. by its Principal Secretary, Ministry of Consumer Affairs, Food and Public Distribution ...RESPONDENTS/PETITIONERS

4. Telangana State Civil Supplies CaRporation Limited, Having its registered ofiice at 6-3-655/1/A, Block-B, Civil Supplies Bhavan, Somajimada Hmierabad-500082 Rep. by its Vice Chairman and Maaarirm Director. 5. Warehouse Manager, Telangana State Warehousing Coapersion PEG Karimanagar ...RESPONDENTS/RESPONDENTS Petition under Section 151 CPC praying that in th6 circumstances stated in the affidavit filed in support of the petition, the High Court may be pleased to vacate the interim order dated 31-07-2024 in WP No. 20506 of 2024 and dismiss the above referred Writ Petition. 50 Counsel for the Petitioners: SRI PASHAM MOHITH counsel ror the Respondent No' 1' . . 3[l n.i. ffil%?i"H-B*o *,oo", Assisting SRI B.NARASIMHA SHARMA ADDL.SOLICITOR GENERAL OF INDIA Counsel for the Respondent No.2: SRI DOMINIC FERNANDES, SC FOR FCI Counsel forthe Respondent No.3 : SRI T.P.ACHARYA, SC FOR TSCSC Counsel for the Respondent No.4 : SRI A.PHANI BHUSHAN, SC FOR TSWC W.P.No.27766 OF 2024 Between:

1. Rice Millers Association Telangana State, Having its registered office at H. No. 8-3-676, Flat No. 206, Fribzidaftasri Towers Yellareddy Guda, Hyderabad - 500 073, Telangana. Also having its office at Flat No. 108, Taj Enclave, Khairtabad Hyderabad - 500 004, Telangana Being represented by its President Ganpaa Nagendra

2. Ganpaa Nagendra, S/o.Ganpaa Laxmi Narayana, Age.65 yrs, Occ. President of Petitioner Society, R|/o. Flat No. 206, Fribzidatta Sri Towers Engineers Colony, Anjaneya Swamy Temple Yellareddy Guda, Khairatabad, Srinagar Colony Hyderabad - 500 073, Telangana ...PETITIONERS AND 1 2 Union of lndia, Rep. by its Principal Secretary, Ministry of Consumer Affairs, Food and Public Distribution, New Delhi. Food Corporation of lndia, Having its regional office at 3rd Floor, HACA Bhavan, Public Gardens Road, Nampally - 500 004, Telangana Rep by its. Director

3. Assistant General Manager, Food Corporation of lndia Having its regional office at 3rd Floor, HACA Bhavan, Public Gardens Road, Nampally- 500 004, Telangana

4. Telangana State Civil Supplies Corporation Limited., Having its registered office at 6-3-655/1/A, Block-B, Civil Supplies Bhavan, Somajiguda, Hyderabad-500082 Rep. by its Vice Chairman and Managing Director, ...RESPONDENTS 5l Petition under Article 226 ol lhe Constitution of lndia praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed therewith, the High Court may be pleased to issue an appropriate writ, order or direction, more particularly one in the nature of writ of Mandamus i. declaring the actions of the Respondents in issuing Communication dated 05.08.2024 bearing no. F. No. 42-212O24'QCC and Communication dated 01.10.2024 bearing no. RO TL-27.OO38.O1112023-PROC- RO TL (E 97949) purportedly rejecting the request of the Petitioners for re- analysis by way of an appeal, thereby in contravention of Standing Operating Procedure (SOP) notified vide communication dated 15.o3.2023 as being illegal, arbitrary, unjust, apart from being unconstitutiona I and contrary to doctrine of legitimate expectation and consequently set aside the same and ii. consequently direct the 2nd Respondent to forthwith follow the procedures contemplated under standing operating Procedure (SOP) notified vide communication dated 15.03.2023, including the appeal procedure / mechanism provided therein' lA NO: 1 OF 2024 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 stay the Communication dated 05.08.2024 bearing no. F. No. 42-212024-QCC, lhe communication dated 01 .10.2024 bearing no. RO rL-27.OO3B.O|1|2023-PROC- RO TL (E 97949), including all the consequential actions i further proceedings, pending disposal of the present Writ Petition. Counsel for the Petitioners: SRI PASHAM MOHITH Counsel for the Respondent No.1 : SRI A.S.VASUDEVAN & SRI K.L.N.RAGHAVENDRA REDDY, Assisting SRI B.NARASIMHA SHARMA ADDL.SOLICITOR GENERAL OF INDIA Counsel for the Respondent No.2&3: SRI DOMINIC FERNANDES, SC FOR FCI Counsel for the Respondent No.4 : SRI T.P.ACHARYA, SC FOR TSCSC The Court made the following: COMMON ORDER THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE J.SREENIVAS RAO WRIT PETITION Nos.15889, t5926, L9lO7, 19159. r9s2l, 19546, 19548 19549 19555 196t4 L962L 19630 L9723 L9946 20506 and27766of2024 COMMON ORDER: Heard Mr- Pasham Mohith, Iearned counsel for lhe petitioners in W.P.Nos. 15889, 15926, 19i59, 19521, 19546, t9548, 19549, 19555, 19614, 19621 , 19630, 20506 and 27766 of 2024, Mr. K.Venumadhav, learned counsel for the petitioners in W.P.Nos. 19107, 19723 al:.d 19946 of 2024, Mr. B.Narasimha Sharma, learned Additional Solicitor General of India assisted by Mr. A.S. Vasudevan and Mr. K. L.N. Raghavendra Reddy, appearing on bchalI of respondent No.1 Union of India and Mr. Dominic Fernande s, lczrrned Standing Counsel appearing on behalf of Food Corporation o[ India (for short 'FCr).

2. In a1l these writ petitions, the petitioners have questioned the action of the respondents in rejecting the delivery of Fortihed Rice Kernels (hereinafter refcrred to as 'FRKJ supplied by the petitioners for the crop year 2023-24 and sought consequential direc[ion [o set aside the inspection conducted by respondent No I on 25.04 .2024, 26.O4 .2024 and 29 .O4.2024 and also reject ing Lhe lol of Acknowledgments submitted by the petitioncrs, and seeking to set ') aside the communication orders issued by respondent Nos.l and 3 declaring as Beyond Rejection Level (for short ,BRLJ and sought consequential direction directing the respondent No.2 to accept the future deliveries of rice by the petitioners rice millers, without reference to the alleged rejection communication orders. Therefore, all the writ petitions were heard together and are being decided by this common order

3. Brief facts of the case: 3.1 For the facilify of reference, facts from W.p.No. l5gg9 of 2024 are being referred to.

3.2. According to the petitioners, petitioner No.1 Association was registered under the Telangana Societies Registration Acl, 2001 and it consisting various rice mills situated in Nalgonda District, Telangana State. The petitioner Nos.3, 5, 7,9, ll, 13 are rhe ricc mills, which are situated in Nalgonda District and they are engaged in the business of supplying rice to respondent No.2. In the year 2022, tine Government of India with an intention to improve the quality of rice, introduced the scheme of fortification of rice, whereby Fortified Rice (FR) wouid be supplied through the Targeted Public Distriburion System (TPDS). Accordingly, respondent No. t had issued Operational Guidelines dated 13.72.2022 on Quality Control for FRK and Fortified Rice. As ) per the said Operational Guidelines, all the rice millers are obligated to blend FRK with Cusrom Milled Rice (for short ,CMR,) in rhe rario of 1:100 by using an automatic btending machine in order to ensure that the blending process takes place in an efhcient manner.

3.3 The petitioners further averred that they are strictly following the Operational Guidelines issued by respondent No. 1 while supplying FRK to respondent No.2. Accordingly, respondent No.2 had accepted such deliveries in the year 2022 without raising .eny objections. However, in [he year 2O23, responden[ No.1 rejccted the deliverics made by the peLitioners after lapse of long period of time through communicaLion dated 06.06.2023 alleging that the FRK wcre not blended with the CMR in the prescribed ratio. Immediately, the petitioners have submitted representation on 18.O8.2023 to respondent No.2, stating that supply of the stocks made respondent authorities accepted the by the petitioners alter conducting thorough inspection and af[er lapse of long period, they are rejected the deliveries on the alreged ground that FRK were not brended with the CMR in the prescribed ratio. Unless the stocks supplied by the petitioners are accepted, they will be put to great irreparable loss. They further stated that the alieged deficiencies in t he nutritional value of FRK cannot be attributed to the petitioners since FRK are procured by the petitioners from the third parties/ agcncies. who have 4 been authorized by respondent No.2 to supply FRK and therefore, any defrciency in the nutritional value of the FRK is attributed to such thirci parties/ agencies only.

3..4 They further averred that basing on the representation submitted by the petitioners and similarly situated rice millers, respondent No.2 and Federation of Ai1 India Rice Millers Association had brought the above said facts [o the notice of respondent No.1 and accordingly, a meeting was convened on 18.08.2O23. During the course ol the said meeting, in order to ensure transparency, it was agreed upon that SOP dated 15.03.2023 notified by respondent No.1 shall be revised. As per the revised notification, FRK will be checked for the level of micro nutrients in fortified rice by gathering the samples in the presence of rice millers and State Government agency. Thereafter, the petitioners have submitted another representation on | | .O9 .2023 requesting respondent No. 1 to resolve the issue pertaining to replacement/ rejection of FRK.

3.5 They further averred that on 26.12.2023 respondent No.1 notihed revised Standard Operating Procedure (for Short'SOP") for quality management protocols for FRK and fortified rice. As per the revised SOP, dated 26.12.2023, in the event, the sample collected lrom rice millers fails on account of blending, an opportunity should 5 be given to the rice millers to bring blending ratio of the rejected stock within the prescribed limits or aiternatively by adding conventional FRK in FR, or by adding conventional rice in fortified rice, so that the blending ratio in the fortified rice becomes acceptable. As per the revised SOP dated 26.12.2023, respondent No. 1 ought to have verified the blending ratio and if the ratio is within the prescribed limit, delivery of FI?K can be accepted.

3.6 It is further averred that in the month of March and April 2024, the petitioners once again made deliveries of FRK to respondent No.2. After conducting a thorough mechanized check up, respondent No.2 has accepted the same without raising any objections. Thereafter, on 25.O4.2024, 26.O4.2024 and 29.O4.2024, respondenr No.t had purportedly deputed a ream to inspec[ the food storage depots under respondent No.2 and calling upon Lhe trxecutive Director, Food Corporation ol India, Zonal Office, South, through communication dated 1 | .06.2024 to take appropriate action for the stocks that have been decla red as BRL.

3.7 The petitioners further averred that respondent No.3 issued notilrcation on 18.06.2024 intimating the petitioners that the stocks delivered by them for the year 2023_24 have been rejected and Lhe same was alleged Iy BRL and further directed the petitioners [o replace 6 the BRL stock with fresh stock. Aggrieved by the same, the petitioners have f-rled the present writ petitions.

4. Respondent No.1 filed counter-afhdavit denying the averments made by the petitioners inter alia contending that the Department ol Food and Public Distribution (for Short "DFPD") have cstablished policies to ensure the delivery of high-quality food grains to beneficiaries and all stakeholders are required to follow the SOP guidelines. A meeting was held on 78.08.2023 with members of The Federation of Rice Millers Association, during which, the SOP dated

15.O3.2022 was discussed. The Federation requested the concerned rice millers be present during the sampling of 10% of the procured and stored stock for micronutrient testing, however, no decision was made by the Ministry on this matter. The Storage and Research (S&R) Division, under the direct supervision of the DFPD, manages post- harvest food grain operations. There are eleven Quality Control Cclls under the DFPD, with headquarters in New Delhi and rcgional ofl-rces. In Telangana, rice procurement is carried out by the State Government (under the Decentralized Procurement Scheme) and the Food Corporation of India (FCl) (under the Non Decentralized Procurement Scheme). The Central Government oversees the quality of food grains procured through both schemes and covers the entire 7 cost of procurement operations for the State Government and Food Corporation of India as per the approved budget

4.1 [t is lurther averred that the quality of the fortified rice slored for distribution through PDS/other welfare scheme s a team of DFPD conducted inspection o[ various FSDs (Food Storage Depot) under FCI, Khammam and Nalgonda Districts w.e.f. 03.05.2023 to 08.03.2023 along with FCI and State Government ofhcials. During the inspection, the sampling u,as done as per lhe ISO (lnternational organization for standardization) norms titled as "lndian Standards CEREAL AND CtrREAL PRODUCTS-SAMPLING (lS 14818:20171". There was completely unbiased selection of stocks made at random, after careful examination ol [he stocks. The samples were drawn and seized during the course of inspection and they were analyzed in the Iaboratory of DFPD under the Ministry of Consumer Affairs, Food & Public Distribution in the presence of respondent No.2 and State Government officials and they were not purposively largeted to a particular rice miller. As the DFPD is the final/appellate authority, there is no provision for the reanalysis of the samples.

4.2 It is also averred that the redressal mechanism i.c., the appeal procedure as mentioned in the writ petition is applicable only during the time of procurement/ acceptance of the stock. As the inspection 8 conducted by the ofhcers of the Ministry is a routine activity, the appeal procedure does not apply to the present case. It is further averred that there is no provision for invorvement of rice milrers at any stage of inspection conducted by the officiais. Moreover, the presence of concerned rice millers is not alowed in order to maintain the conhdentiality of the entire process and to avoid any undue influence on lhe inspecting officers.

5. Respondent No.2 hled counter affrdavit wherein it is stated that respondent No. t had issued operational Guidelines dated 13.12.2022 on quality control for FRK and fortified rice and the rice millers should have an automatic blending machine having the standard ratio prescribed by Bureau of Indian Standards (for short "BIS,,) to ensure accurate blending at a ra[io of 1: lOO.

5. i [t is further averred that the euality Control Cell (eCC) of the Department of Public Distribution, Government of India, conclucts both periodic and surprise inspections at respondent No.2 Depots to monitor the quality of food grains during procurement, storage, and distribution managed by respondent No.2 and other agencies. FCI accepts food grain stocks based on the uniform specilications setup by the Govcrnment of India, as outlined in letter No. F CI He_ QCO12(11)/2/2O23-eC, with reference to the details of inspection, 9 sampling, and analysis procedures for the procurement of paddy and the acceptance/ purchase of rice slocks. In this context, all 14 stocks checked by Ministry are accepted on AGA (Automatic Grain Analyser) for quality parameters at the time of receipt. However, 13 stocks. have been manually analysed in respect of FRK as per SOP of FCIHQQCO29 lI/2024 QC dated 15.02.2024, and 1 stock has been analyzed by AGA machine in respect of FRK.

5.2 It is also averred that all BRL stocks communicated on

06.06.2023 have been replaced by the concerned rice millers during the last year. As per the respondent no.2 letter No.HQ- QCO12(1 l\1212O23-QC, BRL stocks identified during subsequent inspections should be immediately replaced and the stocks must be verified by the AGM (QC) of the concerned Divisional or Regional Office. Accumulating of BRL stocks in Depot premises may not be allowed, as it adversary affect the storage and effect on stocking of fair average quality and potentially disrupting the Public Distribution System, and in case parties do not lift the rejected lots/ consignment within 24 hours, they may not be allowed to dump their consignments. An action will be taken against the concerned mi11er in accordance with the instructions contained in the office letter No. QC / 2 ( 1 ) / O 6 -O7 I Kharit specifi catlons, dated 07 .Oa.2OO7 . t0

5.3 As per revised notifications, FRK must be checked for micro- nutrient levels in the presence of rice millers and State Government agencies is not correct, It is furlher averred that the bleeding ratio of FRK refraction should be in between O.9oh to 12'J/o mandatorily. ' The 14 stocks checked by respondent No.1 were found BRL in terms of blending ratio of FRK which was on lower side i e., O'58% to 0 87o and on higher side blending ratio was 1 .37o to | .72o/o- It is further stated that any higher and lower percentage of FRK or variation in blending ratio prescribed by the Government of lndia O '9o/o to 127o will not supply optimum dose of micronutrients (Vitamin 89, Vitamin B I 2 ' and Iron).

5.4 The appeal procedure is applicable only at the time of acceptance, which follows a three-level process The first level is with the Assistant General Manager (QC), the second level is with the Depuly General Manager (QC) of the Regional Ofhce, and the final level is with the Central Grain Analysis Labouratory, Ministry ol Consumer Affairs, Food, and Public Distribution, Government of India. The Central Grain Analysis Labouratory serves as the appellate Iaboratory for testing physical parameters in food grains such as wheat, rice, paddy, bajra, jowar, millets, and others for various procuring and consuming agencies However, the respondents are requestin-g replace the stocks as per existing guidelines' t1

6. Mr. Pasham Mohith, learned counsel for the petitioners, submitted that the petitioners rice millers are engaged in the business of custom milling of rice and supplying the rice to respondent No.2. In the year 2022, the Government of India introduced a scheme for the fortihcation of rice lo improve its quality, ensuring that fortifled rice is supplied through the TPDS in accordance with guidelines framed by respondent No.2. As per the Operational Guidelines notified by respondentNo.2, all the rice millers are obligated to blend FRK with CMR in the ratio of 1:10O. The petitioners delivered FRK to respondent No.2 in March and Aprll 2024, and after conducting a thorough mechanized check, the stocks were accepted without any objections.

6.1 He further submitted that a surprise check u,as conducted, without communication or intimation to the petitioners, on the stocks lying with respondent No.2. On 11.06.2024, rhe QCC of respondent No.2 reported to the Director that during the inspection of three depots, total 56 rice sar-.'rples were collected, and out of it, 14 stocks were declared as BRL. It was recommended that the stocks be replaced as per procedure and liquidated only after verification by the DFPD team. The surprise check conducted by the officials of respondent No.2 is contrary to the SOP- t2

6.2 He further submitted that on 18.06.2024, the State Civil Supplies Corporation Limited, District Office, Nalgonda, issued a letter regarding the replacement of BRL stocks. The analysis showed that only one sample exceeded Lhe l.25Vo FRK shows as BRL, while the other 13 had minor FRK percentage variations due to handling. On the very same day, the petitioners requested [he Commissioner of Civil Supplies, Hyderabad, [o re-examine/ re-analysis the samples. However, the petitioners' request for re-analysis has not been considered.

6.3 He further submitted that QCC team had drawn samples, without issuing notice and opportunity to the petitioners and without conducting on-the-spot analysis and even without complaint from any individual. 1'he respondents have not followed the mandatory procedure as completed under SOP. On 05.O8.2O24, the petitioners requested the respondent No.2 to re-examine the samples. However, the same was not considered the same.

6.4 He also submitted that the petitioners urged that the procedure for fortified rice samples was not followed correctly, as the initial analysis was not conducted within the prescribed time. The checking process should have been completed within 24 hours and any rejection should have been conveyed within one week of dumping, 13 especially when the respondents have conducted surprise checks in the absence of any complaints or grievances is not permissibie under

6.5 He also submitted that on 26-09.2023, respondcnt No 2 has issued guidelines for sampling and analysis procedure to be followed in procurement of paddy and acceptance/ purchase of rice stocks during Kharif marketing season 2023-24. As per clause 9, samples will be drawn jointly with State Government representative by the technical assistant for the purpose of analysis to determine the uniform the consignment as per acceptability of specihcation/ SOP. Hou,ever, Clause Nos. I 2 and l7 were not lollowcd and Clause No.23 states mandatory checks and quality control teams should conduct surprise checks with reports critically examined. He further submits that ISO regulations lor cereals and pulses sampling were adopted by the Bureau of Indian Standards. As per the SOP dated 15.03.2023, there is a provision of appeal mechanism under Clauses 3 and 5. He further submitted that the resPondents have not communicated the report to lhe petitioners and also not provided an appeal mechanism exists at the time of acceptance oI stock.

6.6 He further submitted thal on L2.Ol .2024 , respondent No 2 introduced enhanced quality control measures using an Al-based l4 automated grair, ar.alyzer. Clause 6 states that if the AI analyzer malfunctions, samples can be tested at a nearby center and manual analysis is permitted with explicit GM (Region) approval to prevent work disruptions.

6.7 He further submitted that the appeal procedure for Fortified Rice, as per Government o[ India's 2023 guidelines, mandates drawing three sealed samplcs at Lhe time of stock acceptance in the presence of officials and any stocks later identified as BRL must be replaced by the rice millers. He further submitted that respondent No.2 in its leLter, uide RO TL-27.O038.O11/2O23-PROC-RO TL (E 97949) dated

01.1O.2024, clearly stated that there is no provision of reconsideration and opportunity for representation/joint analysis of rice samples in the presence of all stakeholders, as per the instructions/guidelines issued by the Ministry.

6.8 He further submitted that respondent No.2 not followed [he proper guidelines while conducting the surprise check and also denied the opportunity to present their case. He further argued that respondent No.2 did not maintain proper storage and affecting stock quality.

6.9 In support of his contentions, he relied upon the following judgments; l5

1. Mahavir Rice and General Mills v. State of Punjabl

2. East India Commercial Co. Pt/t. Ltd. v. Central board of revenue, Delhi2

3. M/s. Sankambari Rice Industry, Bargarh and ors v. UOI (w.P (clNo.287oo of 2cr221

7. Mr. K. Venumadhav, learned counsei lor the petilioners, submitted that the stocks were received by respondent No.2 from the petitioners from 18.03.2O24 to O5.O5.2O24. On the same day, tests were conducted and accepted them, as per guidelincs issued by respondent No.2. But, later, on 11.O7.2024, the respondenls conducted a surprise check, without issuing any notice, and passed order stating that the said stocks are BRL and requested to replace the same. Therefore, the same is gross violation of principle of natural justice.

8. Mr. B.N. Sharma, iearned Additional Solicitor General of India appearing for the respondents, submits thac W. P. Nos. 15889 and 15926 of 2O24 should have been dismissed for mis-joinder of parties, as the impugned order dated 18.06.2024 applied only to six rice millers directing them to replace the BRL stock with fresh stock. Similarly, W.P. No. 27766 of 2024 f/.ed by the association should also 12023 SCC online P&H 1631 I1972scconlineDel3l7 t6 be dismissed, since separate writ petitions had already been fiied before this Court.

8.1 Learned Senior Counsel further submitted that the Central Government introduced the scheme under TPDS for the purpose of supplying the rice to the people, who are below the poverty line, students, pregnant women, etc.,. He further submitted that National Accreditation Board for Testing and Calibration Laboratories supervise the testing and ensuring lortified rice blended at the correct ratio of 1 gm. of FRK per 100 gr. of CMR by conducting random checks with 40 lakhs metric tons of paddy sampled at a 10%o rate. He further submitted that any initial rejection at delivery only allows a remedy of appeal is available. a.2 He further submitted that surprise checks were conducted by the Central Government team along with the officials of respondent No.2 and Civil Supplies Corporation. There are 30 rice millers hled writ petitions from Nalgonda and Karimnagar Districts. Hence, the writ petition filed by the Association i.e., W.P.No.27766 of 2024 questioning the very same procedure is not maintainable and the same is abuse of process of law.

8.3 He also submitted that periodic checks and surprise checks were condqcted as per the Operational Guidelines on quality control t1 for FRK and FR, dated 13.12.2O22. Later, revised SOP was issued on

26.12.2023 in order to maintain the quality of FRK and FR and to provide good quality FR to the beneltciaries and all the stakeholders are advised to ensure strict compliance.

8.4 The appeal mechanism applies only at the stage of accepting CMR and no[ subsequent inspections. On 15.03.2023, the appeal procedure for fortified rice samples failing to meet the DFPD and FSSAI norms was established. The decisions made by referral or appellate labs are hnal and cannot be questioned by any stakeholders

8.5 He further submitted that there are 11 quality control cells under respondent No.2 S&R Division in New Delhi, tasked with ensuring food grain quality during procurement, storage and distribution. These cells conduct periodic and surprise inspections al various locations and formulate policies and SOPs for quality management. On 26.09.2023, respondent No.2 had issued guidelines for inspecting and accepting rice stocks during 2O23-2024 Kharif season. According to the said guidelines, the stocks identified as BRL on subsequenl inspection should immediately be got replaced by the concerned rrce miller and the replaced stock should invariably be verihed by the AGM (QC) and BRL stocks cannot be zrccumulated in respondent No.2 Depots and in case [he rice millers do not lift the 18 rejected consignment within 24 hours, they may not be allowed to dump their consignment. As on the date of inspection, 14 rice millers in Nalgonda and 16 rice millers in Karimnagar were instructed to replace their stocks, though none were rejected, and some rice millers were already replaced the stock. Hence, the relief sought by the petitioners rejecting the delivery of FRK is not true and correct'

8.6 The rice millers association filed W.P. No. 27766 of 2024 and the same is not maintainable under law on the ground that association is not an aggrieved party, especially the affected parties/ aggrieved parties have already writ petitions. Learned Senior counsel lurther submitted that the impugned proceeding issued by the respondents dated 15.03.2023 is valid and replacing stocks does not equate to rejection. The respondents after foltowing operational Guidelines and SOP, directed the petitioners to replace the fresh stock and the technicai issues raised by the petitioners cannot be adjudicated in the writ petitiori under Article 227 of the Constitution of India'

8.7 He further submitted that the judgments cited by the petitioners are not applicable to the present facts and circumstances of the case' since the judgment referred by the petitioners supra 2 relating to the petroleum products and supra 3 was withdrawn by the petitioners therein ' .--- t9 8,8 In support of his contention, he relied upon the judgment of the Hon'ble Apex Court in Jayant Verma v. Union of India3. The said judgment emphasizes the importance of adhering to lhe principle that general lcgislative entries should not be interpreted in a manner that undermines specific entries in the line with the maxim " generolia specialibus non deroganf. The principle is Crucial in present case as it highlights the necessity of the following Operational Guidelines and SOP strictly.

9. Mr. Dominic Fernandes submitted that the manufacture of FRK and fortified rice requires a blending ratio test within the limit of 1 : i 0O, as per lhe procedure oullined in the SOP. Clause 2. 1 states that FRK manufacturers must have an FSSAI license / registration and the blending ratio should range from O.9 to 7.2. There are stages of quality management protocols of FRK and fortified rice, which are Stage 1 : As 'per the quality management protocols for F RK and fortilred rice dated 26.12.2023, the vitamins and minerals premix (VMP) used must comp[5' with FSSAI guidelines, and manufacturers must obtain a Certilicate of Analysis (COA) lrom FSSAl-approved laboratories, which should include a QR code for verification. Manufacturers must maintain batch-wise records of the COA and premix used for audit trails accessible to authorities. In Stage 2, rice ' (2018) 4 SCC 743 20 millers blending FRK with conventional rice must procure FRK from FSSAI-licensed suppliers, use a blending machine as per BIS standards, and ensure homogenous blending at lo/o by weight. Qualiry checks should be performed through hourly blending efhciency tests, and records must be maintained. Periodic and surprise checks by DFPD are mandated, as mentioned in the letter dated 11.06.2024, which also requires periodic checks of PDS quality. These guidelines, formulated by the Department of Food and Public Distribution on

13.12.2022, are to be strictly adhered to by all stakeholders to ensurc high-quality fortified rice for beneliciaries, with immediate effect.

9. 1 He further submitted that the appeal mechanism is only applicable at the stage of accepting CMR and not for subsequent inspections. As per the order of respondent No.2, dated 15.O3.2O23, the appeal procedure for fortified rice samples found BRL as the prescribcd norms issued by the DFPD, Government of India, and FSSAI, is hnal and it cannot be challenged by any agency or stakeholder. Actions against delinqucnts will be based on the ministry's report. The existing appeal procedure for rejection of rice stocks during the acceptance of CMR will continue to apply only to physical analysis parameters as specihed by the Government of India. Therefore, no remedy of appeal is not provided or allowed at the subsequent inspection stages. He further submitted that the rice 21 identified as BRL must be immediately replaced. How'ever, out of 56 samples, 14 samples were found exceeding the uniform specification limit of rice and declared as BRL. The respondent authorities are directed that the stocks that are declared as BRL may be replaced as per the procedure and they have not rejected the stocks, which were declared as BRL. If the fresh stocks were supplied in place of BRL, no prejudice would be caused to the petitioners.

9.2 He further submitted that as per the SOP for the Kharif season 2023-24, any BRL must be immediately replaced by the responsible rice miller being verihed by the AGM (QC) of the concerned Divisional or Regional Office. Additionally, the accumulation of BRL in respondent No.2 Depots is strictly prohibited. If the rejected lots are not removed within 24 hours, appropriate action will be taken against the rice millers.

9.3 In support of his submission, he relied upon of the judgment of the High Court o[ Punjab and Haryana at Chandigarh in Isher Singh Hardeep Singh Rice Mills v. State of Punjab and othersa. The principle of judicial restraint in administrative matters stating that the procedural decision lie with authorities and interference is warranted only in the cases of misuse of power or procedural violations. It 4 2023 SCC online P& 2830 22 declines to direct an investigation, emphasizing the discretion of the authorities in policy implementation

10. Learned counsel for the petilioncrs, by way of rcply, submitted that FRK manufacturers must maintain batch-wise records of Certificates of Analysis and the vitamins and minerals premixed in production, uploading them to the FSSAI portal for audit purposes. These records must also be available for inspection by respondent No.2, DFPD and other authorities. He further submitted that the rice miller association has locus standi in the matter. The respondent authorities have conducted initial inspection without pointing out any discrepancies. Later, the respondents conducted surprise checks in their absence and lhe stocks were declared as BRL, without following the due procedure and acted according to their own whims and fancies. He submitted that SOP mandates that tests to be conducLed within two months, but this timeline was not adhered to by the respondents.

10.1 He further submitted that the respondents used both AI machines and manual methods for testing the stock, but the procedure was unclear and no reasons were provided with regard to discrepancy. [t is stated in the counter-affrdavit of respondent No.2 that i 3 stocks were manually analyzed and 1 stock was tested by using AI machincs and they failed to explain the rationale behind using manual sampling in some cases. In essence, the petitioners argue that the inspection processr surprise checks, and sampling procedures were flawed, lacked transparency, and violated the SOp. lO.2 In reply submissions again he relied upon the following judgmen ts

1. State bank of India and others v. Rajesh Argarwal and otherss

2. Akhil Bharatiya Soshit Karmachari Sangh v. Union of India & Ors6

3. Jasbhai Motibhai Desai V. Basher Ahmed And OrsT Roshan Kumar, Haji Analysis: 1 i. Having considered the rival submissions made by respective parties and after perusal of material available on record, it reveals that in the year 2022, Lhc Government of India introduced the scheme of fortification of rice, u'hereby fortihed rice wouid be supplied through the TPDS for the purpose of supplying the rice to the people, who are below the poverty line , students, pregnant women, etc., Accordingly, respondent No. t had issued Operational Guidelines dzrted 13.12.2023 u ' lzoo:; o scc r 1reatl r scc z+o ' l rszolr scc oz r 24 on quality control for FRK and FR formulated by the DFPD in order to maintain quality standards. As per the said guidelines' all the rice millers have obligated to blend FRK with CMR in the ratio of 1:100 by using an automatic blending machine prescribed by respondent No 2' According to the petitioners, they are strictly following SOP procedure issued by respondent No.1. However, in the year 2022' respondent No.1 rejected lhe deliveries made by the petitioners alleging that the FRK was not blended properly with CMR in the prescribed ratio Pursuant to the same, the petitioners have submitted representation dated 18.08.2023 to respondent No'2, wherein it is stated that the respondent authorities accepted the supply of the stocks made by the petitioners after conducting initial inspection and after lapse of long period, they arc not entitled to reject the deliveries made by them' Pursuant to the said representation, under the Chairmanship of the Secretary (Food and Public Distribution), on the issues raised by the Federation of All India Rice Millers Association' conducted a meeting on18.08.2023'Inthesaidmeeting,inorrlertoensuretransparency, it was agreed upon that SOP dated 15 03 2023 notified Lry respondent No.1 has been revised. As per the revised notihcation' dated 26.12.2023, DFPD may conduct surprise checks to ensure the of micronutrients in Fortihed Rice at any stage petitioners have submitted another representatlon prescribed level Theredfter, the 25 dated 11.O9.2023 requcsting respondent No.1 to resolve the issues pertaining to replacement oI FR

12. [n March 2024 to June 2024, the petitioners made deliveries of FR to respondent No.2 ernd after conducting thorough mechanized checking, the officials accep[ed the same r,r.ithout raising any objections. However, oo 25.04.2024, 26.04.2024 and 29.O4.2024, respondent No.1 had purportedly deputed a team to inspect respondent No.2 Dep()ts and callrng r.rpon thc Executive Director, Foocl Corporation of India, Zonal Office, South, through communication dated 1 | .06.2024, to take appropria[e action lor the stocks that have been declared as BRL. Thereaftcr, rcspondent No.3 issued proceedings dated 18.06.2024 in[orming rhe petirioners that the stocks dehvered by them for the year 2023 24 have been found BRL and directed the petitioners to replacc the BRL stock rvith fresh stock.

13. In a1l the writ petitions, ir is stated that the rice millers have installed the prescribed machinery to ensure that effective blending of FRK with CMR and they procured FRK lrom the licensed manufacturers, who havc been authorized by respondent No.2. The blending machine operates the blending as per the ratio prescribed. Thereafter, the rice millers deliver the FR to respondent No.2. Upon receiving such deliveries, respondent No.2 r,r,ill concluct testing and l11 once such dclivery is acceptcd, the role of rice millers comes to an end.

14. The grievance of the petitioners is that as per SOP dated 15.03.2023, the respondenl authorities shall conduct physicat analysis of the parametcrs by drawing samples from the stocks' which were delivered by the petitioners However, the respondents without conducting such test ancl afler accepting the deliveries' conducted surprise inspection and rejected the deliveries of the petitioners On 11.06.2024, respondenL No'1 addressed a letter to respondent No 2 Corporation, wherein it is stated that as per the procedure' the team from the Ministry u'as depuled to inspect the food storage depots und.er respondent No.2 in the month of Aprll' 2024 ' During the course of inspection, three depots were inspected and in total 56 numbers of rice samplcs '"vere collected Thereafter' they conducted analysis test and basing on the detailed analysis report' it is found that out of total 56 sampies of rice, 14 samples were found exceeding the uniform specification limit of rice and deciared as BRL On 12.07.2024, respondent No 1 found in other Depots that out of 75 samples, 17 were lound exceeding the uniform specification limit and were declared as BRL. They further stated that the stocks that were declared as BRL may be replaced at the eariiest' as per the procedure' 27

15. The record further reveals [hal as per the mandate of Government of India, a team of DFPD conducted inspection of various FSBS, which are under the control of FCI in various districts in the S[ate of Telangana, along with FCI and Statc Government ofhcials in the month of March to June, 2024. During the course of inspection, they have collected the samples and conducted test as per the higher standards litled as "lndian Standards CtrREAL AND CEREAL PRODUCTS-SAMPLING". The said samplcs were drawn and sealed in the presence of Food Corporation of India and State Government Officials. The samples drawn during inspections were analyzed in the Laboratory of DFPD under the Ministry of Consurner Affairs, Food and Public Distribution as per BIS standards titled as 'Fortihed Rice Specifications'.

16. The claim of the petitioners is that respondent authorities have conducted surprise checks, especially withoul giving any notice and opportunity to the petitioners and without following due procedure prescribed under the SOP and also conducted tesl without issuing notice and opportunity to the petitioners and basing on the alleged report furnished by the Government Authority, the respondent authorities rejected the stocks supplied by the petitioners on'the ground that the same were found as BRL and the same is gross violation of principles of natural justice and contrary to the SOP. The 10 record reveals that as per the mandate of Government of India' Storage and Research (S&R) Division works, as a regulatory authority' conduct surprise checks to ensure that good quality of food grains have to reach to the beneficiaries The inspection of food grains are carried out at Food Storage Depots (FCI, CWC, SWC & other State agency godowns), rice mills, rail heads, truck heads and Fair Price Shops by the Officers of the Quality Control Cells' which are under the direct of the DFPD with its headquarters in New Delhi and Regional Offices at Kolkata, Hyderabad, Bangalore' Bhopal' Bhubaneshwar, Lucknou', Pune, Patna, Chennai and Guwairati The Depots were selected by the deputcd Inspecting Officer invariably and randomly as per the availability of stock position in the godowns' During the course of inspection, the inspection team draws the samples and sent for analysis test in the laboratory of DFPD as per the BIS standards. In the saicl test, it was revealed that the stocks supplied by the petitioners arc BRL' the surprrse

17. The record further reveals that in inspection/check, as per thc SOP, there is no requirement of issuance of prior notice to the petitioners proposing to conduct surprise check/ inspection and also there is no requircment to conduct analysis test in the p.."".tt" of the petitioners' especially when the petitioners 29 have not attributed any malahdes against the officials of respondent Nos.1 and 2 Lhat they intentionally refused to itccept the stock supplied by them. Hence, the relief sought by the peLitioners seeking to declare the action of the respondents in rejecring rhe delivery of FR made by the petitioners for the crop year 2023-24 as illegal, is not ter-rable under law, especially on the ground that the rcspondents have not rejected the stock supplied by them and rhcy only directed the petitioners to replace the stocks as per the SOp for quali[r managemen t for FRK and FR, as the said rice is me an t for public Distribution System.

18. It is pertinent to mention that the petitioners have nor brought to the notice of this Court any provision or- pr<;cedure that the presence of the parties is required at the timc of conducting inspection, drawing of the samples and also at the tilne of conducting analysis tesl. It reveals from the record that thc prescnce of the rice millers is not allowed on the ground that the respondents have to maintain confidentiality of the entire process ;rnd to avoid undue influence on the concerned Inspecting Officcrs. Hence, the contentions raised by the learned counsel lor th. pctitioners that the respondents have conducted surprise inspections, drew samples and 30 conducted analysis test without providing notice or an opportunify and rejected the stocks supplied by them is not tenable under law'

19. Insofar as the other contentions raised by the learned counsel for the petitioners that though the petiLioners have submitted representation on 18.06.2024 before respondent No'3 authorities requesting respondent No.2 to reanalyze the samples, the respondent authorities have not taken any decision nor provided remedy of appeal against the decision of respondent No.l are concerned, as per the guidelines framed under SOP dated 26.\2 2OO3, there is no remedy of appeal is provided against the decision taken by respondent Nos l and 2 authorities on the ground that they conducted inspection subsequent to the acceptance of the stock by way of surprise checks' As per the instructions issued by rcspondent No 2 dated 26 'O9 '2023, the remedy of appeal is provided at thc timc of acceptance of FR only, but not subsequent stage of inspections'

20. In the case on hand, the competent authority conducted surprise checks and after analyzing the samplcs, came to conclusion that the stocks supplied by the petitioners'rice millers found that they are exceeding the uniform specification limit of rice and declared as BRL. Pursuant to the same, respotldent No' 1 issued proceedings dated 1 Ifl6..2O24 informing respondent No 2 to take necessary sleps 3l lor replacement of the stocks. pursuant to the above said proceedings as rvell as the proceedings issued by respondent No.2, the Telangana State Civil Supplies Corporation Limited and Teiangana Warehousing Corporation, [hrough impugned proceedings requested the petitioncrs, rice millers to arrange the replacement of BRL stocks u,ith fresh stocks. Hence, the contention raised by the learned counsel lor the pctitioners that the respondent authorities rejected the stocks is not tenablc under law, since the respondents have not re..;ected the stock ancl they only requested the petitioners, rice millers to replace the stocks on the ground that the stocks supplied by the petitior.rers,rice millcrs were lound BRL. counsel for thc absence of any

21. The other contentions raised by the learned petiLioners that the inspecting authorities, in the permission, conducted surprise physical inspection and cond ucted manual tcsting contrary to the additional guidelines daLed 15.O2.2024 are concerned, the said guidelines were issued lor enhancement ol quality control measures for usage of Artificial Inte,igence based an Automated Grain Analyzer (AIAGA) and the said additional guidelines are came with effect frorn 15.02.2024. Whereas, ln the case on thc surprise check was conducted by the competent authority as per the guidelines framed under SOp dated 15.03.2023 and taken and conducte d test manually, wherein they found that samples the FR supplied by the petitioners' rice millers are BRL' As per the SOP dated 15.03.2023, the authorities concerned are enLitled to conduct surprise checks at food storage depots' rice mills' railheads' truck heads and Fair Price Shops and also no prior intimation is required' As per clause 2 (b) of the SoP d'ated 16'07 '202 I issucd by responden[ No.1, surprise inspection can be conducted al any time by the Joint team without giving any prior notice to the concerned authorities of the S tate Government' 22. In Mahavir Rice and General Mill (supra)' the High Court of Punjab and Haryana at Chandigarh held that when the pctitioners are denied allotment of paddy on the ground of defective lortified rice when there is no defect in the CMR and defect in the forfeited rice is on account of low quality of FRK and FRK has not been manufactured by them, the Court is of the considered opinion that it would be unjust, unfair and violative of Articles 14 and 19(1)(9) ot the Constitution of India' 23. [n East India Commercial Co' I]vt' Ltd' (supra) ' the High Court of Delhi held that the failure to draw samples in the presence of the petitioners and the lack of connection betn'een the test report' Additionally, penalties under Section 167(8) should be imposed only in cases involving prohibited goods' not mis-de scription' However' this JJ case is not applicable on the ground that lssue pertains to petroleum not lood corporation

24. In M/s. Sankambari Rice Industry, Bargarh (supra), the High Court of Orissa at Cuttack, held that this case is not arpplicable to present case as it is only an interim order and subsequently the main u,rit petitior-r was also dismissed as withdrawn on 09.05.2023.

25. [n State Bank of India and others (supra), lhe Hon'blc Supreme Court referring to principles of natural justicc helcl that RBI's circular classifying an accounI as fraudulent does not automatically amount to blacklisting. In the present case, the resupply of BRL stocks do not impact to any of the petitioncrs, as tlre stocks were not rejected but merely requested for replacement.

26. I n Akhil Bharatiya Soshit Karmachari Sangh (supra) , the Hon'ble Sr-rpreme Court held that. Article 32 is not Iimited to recognized associations or individuals with a direct cause of action. Horvever, the present case involves the rejection of stocks and all the rice millers have already Iiled separate writ petitions. Hence, there is no necessitv for an Association or Telangana Societies Rice Millcrs to be a party to the litigation. 34

27. In Jasbhai Motibhai Desai (supra), the Hon'ble Supreme Court held that the principle highlighted in this case is that only those with a legitimate legal interest or grievance' specihcally a "person aggrieved," should be allowed to challenge administrative decisions through writ jurisdiction. The court emphasizes the importance ol strict scrutiny in determining standing to prevent frivolous petitions' protect public policy, and ensure that the exercise of discretionary healthy comPetition or violate powers does not undermine lundamen tal rights. However, in the present case, aggrieved rice millers have already filed individual writ petittons

28. It is brought to the notice of this Court that during the pendency of the writ petitions, pursuant to the decision takcn by the respondent authorities, Dhanalaxmi Industries i e ' the petitioner in W.P.No. 19723 of 2024 ' had already replaced 174 MT of BRL stock' Hence, the grievance of the writ petitioner in W'P No L9723 of 2024 is no more in exrstence

29. Insofar as the other writ petitions are concerned' it is already stated supra, that respondent Nos l and 2 ailthorities have not rejected the FR supplied by the petitioners and only directed them to replace the stocks as per the norms fixed under SOP' as the stocks supplied;i the petitioners are found BRL' and this Court does not 35 find any ground, much less valid ground to interfere with the impugned orders passed by the respondent authorities exercising the powers conferred under Article 226 of the Constitution of India.

30. Accordingly, all the writ pe[itions are dismissed. No order as to CoStS Miscellaneous petitions, pending if any, shall stand closed //TRUE COPY// SD/.MOHD. ISMAIL TANT REGISTRAR SECTION OFFICER

1. One CC to SRI PASHAM MOHITH, Advocate. [OPUC] 2. One CC to SRI K.VENUMADHAV, Advocate. [OPUC] 3. One CC to SRI B.NARASilUHA SARrMA, (Additiohat Solicitor Generat of _ lndia), High C_o,Lrt_fgt !t.," State of Tetangana dt Hyderabad. [OpUC] 4. One CC to SRI DotvllNlC_FERNANDES; Standing Counset fbr FCI.'[OpUC] 5. One CC to SRI T.P.ACHARYA, SC for Telangana State Civit'supplies 6. One CC to SRI A.PHANI BHUSHAN, SC FOR TSWC. IOPUC] 7. Two CD Copies. Corporation. [OPUC] BSK L To, HIGH COURT DATED:1'110312025 COMMON ORDER WP.Nos. 15889, 15926, 19107,19159, 19521, 19546, 19549, 19549, 19555, 19614,19621, 19630, 19723,19946, 20506 &27766 0F 2024 o DISMISSING THE WRIT PETITTONS WITHOUT COSTS 53- .P

2.- u:- '--'1 i tt; "i r'q e' 2I APB 2o?5 i t Dc i; r,t-o- ,l 1D