The High Court · 2025

Judgment

1. 2 M/s..Nalg!,nda District Rice Millers Association, Havinq its regrstered office at Ma rket, Na rso noa - soaoo rl' i;Ufi ;;; d;r;, g" **p i"L;,'t.,:i oi fl #Jj,l, 8f,", HEil,lbi'siiifr ,il!'-:{['if 'e:?'i[,]p%.r"1*o"?3';n3t??oH],8: Nalgonda - 508001 , Telangana 5

3. Sri Laxmi Sai Par boiled Rice lndustries, Nakrekal, Nalgonda Rep. by its Partner Thanupunuri Venkateshwarulu.

4. Thanupunuri Venkateshwarulu, S/o. Somiah, Age Sri Laxmi Sai Par boiled Rice lndustries R/o. H. Nakrekal, Nalgonda- 508211 , Telangana .54 No. 20 ars, Occ. Partner of -2119, Market Road,

5. Murali Manohara Agro Food Products (P) Ltd, Munugodu. (V) (M), Nalgonda Rep. by its Partner Edukulla Damodar

6. Edukulla Damodar, Sio. Guruvaiah, Aged about 60 years Occ. Partner of Murali Manohara Agro Food Products (P) Ltd R/o. H. No 6-5-178 Beat Market Nalgonda, 50800, Telangana

7. .Sri Balaji Parboiled lvlodem Rice Mill, DVK Road, Nalgonda- 508004' Telangana Rep. by its Partner Julakanti Indra Reddy

8. Julakanti lndra Reddy, Sio. Veera Reddy, Aged about 75 years Oc.q. Partner of Sri Balaji Rice lndustries R/o. H.No 5-1 , Devarakonda Road Nalgonda, SCDC Nalgonda - 508 00'l , Telangana

9. Kamadhenu Rice Mills Pvt. Ltd, Sagar Road, Miriyalaguda- 508 207 Rep. by its Partner Singirikonda Venunath

10. Singirikonda Venunath, S/o. Lachaiah, Kamadhenu Rice mills Pvt. Ltd RYo. Miriyalaguda- 5O82O7 , Telangana Age. 65 years Occ. Partner of H No. 1 1-'136, Seetharampuram 'll.Gayatri Rice lndustries, Yadgarpally, Kqdad R99!, IMiryalguida, Nalgonda, 506 207, Telangana Rep. by its Partner M Rama Krishna Rao

12. M Rama Krishna Rao, Sio. Rammurthy, Age.72 years Occ. Partnerof Gayatri Rice lndustries Rl/o. Reddy Colony, IMiryalguda, 508207 Telangana

13. M/s. Sri Laxmi Narayana Rice lndustries, H. No. 2-589A1 , Eswar Road, DVK Road, Haliya - 5OB 377, Nalgonda, Telangana Rep. by its Partner Mittapelli Satyavathi 'l4.Mittapelli Satyavathi, Wio. Loknadham, Age. 67 years, Occ- Partner of Sri Laxnii Naraylna Rice lndustries H. No. 5-42, Veeriah Nagar, Anumula Village, Haliya- 508 377, Telangana ..,RESPONDENTS/WRIT PETITIONERS 15.Union of lndia, Rep. by its Principal Secretary, Ministry of Consumer Affairs, Food and Public Distribution l6.Telanqana State Civil Supplies Corporation Limited, Having its registered office- at 6-3-655/1/A, iliock-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 011o712024 in w.P.No. 15889 0f 2024 and dismiss the above referred Writ Petition. Counsel for the Petitioners: SRI PASHAM MOHITH c o u n s e I ro r th e Re s po n d e n t N o 1 6 iii fi iu tlh mx f,frff ,ro*fJi, o ADDL.SOLICITOR GENERAL '.)F INDIA Counsel for the Respondent No.2: SRI DOMINIC FERNANDES, S(: FOR FCI Counsel forthe Respondent No.3 : SRI T.P.ACHARYA, SC FOR TSCSC W.P.No.15926 OF 20:24 Between: 1 . Yadadri Bhong r District Rice tvlillers Association,_Havin^g its r:gistered office at Y.L.NS Coi plex, Shop no. 4and5, Bhongir - 508'l 16' Dislrict, Telangana Being represenbd by its President, Mutha Venkatesham

2. Martha Venkat,:sham, S/o. Late Vasudev Age 58 years, Occ President Fl/o. H. No. 3-1-'16515 D, Vidyanagar, Bhongir - 5081 16' Telangana

3. Suryapet Distri,;1. Rice Millers Association, Having its registerel office at Rep- by its Partner VemPathi Madhu

4. Vempathi Madnu, S/o. Kanthaiah Aged aLout 9-5 .y"gts^ Oc: President-of Surybpet District Rice tVlillers Association Rl/o. Kodad, Sury;pet' 508 213, Telangana

5. Manikanta Partniled Rice Industries, Yadadri District, Bhuvanzrgiri, Telangana Rep. by its Parlrer lt/lartha Venkatesham

6. M/s. Vijaya Lakshmi Binny Rice Mill, Yadadri District, Bhuvan:rgiri, Telangana Rep. by its Parlrer Jilla Venkata Ramana

7. Jilla Venkata Ramana, S/o. Late Veeresham Age. 60 years Occ. Partner, R/o. H. No. '1-3-1 01 t(isaan Nagar, Bhongir- 5081 16

8. Yadadri Rice lrCustries, Yadadri District, Bhongir Rep. by itr; Partner Juluri Ram Mohan

9. Juluri Ram tr/ohan, S/o. Rajaiah, Age. 44 years Occ. Partne', Rl/o. Flat No. 102, Jayabheri l-owers, Prabhath Nagar, ChaitanyaPuri Hyderi'rbad - 500060 10. Sri Vijaya Durga Parboiled Rice lndustries, Yadadri Distric t, Bhuvanagiri, Telangaha Rep. by its Partner Y. Sudhakar Reddy

11.Y. Sudhakar Feddy, S/o. Narayan Reddy, Age.69 years R/:. Plot No.32, Vanasthali Purarn, LB Nagar, Hyderabad, Telangana - 500070

12. Shiva Sai Maltikarjuna Rice Mill, Yadadri District, Bhuvana,Jiri, Telangana Rep. by its Parlrrer S. Narsi ReddY

13.S. Narsi RedJy, Amrutha Reddy, Age. 40 years R/o. I No. 3-126' Posanikunta, Trukkapuram Atmakur Mandal, Yadadri District,l elangana 14. Shubhodaya Rir;e lndustries, Yadadri District, Bhuvanagiri, 1 elangana Rep- by its Partner N1. Srinivas Yadav

15.M. Srinivas Yadav, S/o. Late Malkaiah, Age. 57 years Rl/c. H.No. 7-167' Mahatma Gandhi Road Bhudan Pochampalli - 50 )284 Yadadri District,Telangana

16.Ravi Krishna F'i,:e lndustry, Suryapet, Telangana Rep. by its Partner Gunda Krishna

17.Gunda Krishnir S/o. Gopaiah, Age. 63 years Rl/o. H.No 1-4-24913814, Vidyanagar Surl'apet, Telangana - 508213 7

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 Fi/o. H. No. 1-290, Gaddi Pally Garedipally Mandal, Suryapet District- 50820'1 Telangana ...PETITIONERS AND 1 UNION OF lNDlA, Union of lndia Rep. by its Principal Secretary, lVlinistry of Consumer Affairs, Food and Public Distribution

2. 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

3. 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 [\/anaging 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 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 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 12.06.2024 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 Reporl dated 11.06.2024 including all the consec uential actions / further proceedings, pending disposal of the present Writ Petition. ' lA NO: 1 OF 2024 Petition unde,r section 151 CPC praying that in the circum;tances stated in the affidavit filed in support of the petition, the High court may be pleased to direct the Respondents t() accept the FRK rice being delivered by the Petitioner- during the crbp years 2O2i;2024 including all the future deliveries witl out reference to the alleged rejeclirln of the 2nd Respondent, communicat :d by the 2nd Respondent vide (rrmmunication dated 12.06.2024 during the pendency of the writ petition. lA NO: 3 OF 2024 Between: Union Of lndia, Unic,n of tndia Rep. by its Principal Secretary, Minis'ry of Consumer Affairs, Food and Pttblic Distribution ...PETITIONERY1.'t RESPONDENT AND 1 2 J 4 5 6 o Yadadri Bhorrgir District Rice Milters Association, Having it: registered office at Y.L.NS Cori.rplex, Shop no. 4and5, Bhongir - 508116, D strict, Telangana Being repres,:nted by its President, Mutha Venkatesham t\rlartha Venkatesham, S/o. Late Vasudev Age 58 years, O< c. President FYo. H. No.3-1-1€i5/5D, Vidyanagar, Bhongir- 508116, Telangan t Suryapet District Rice Millers Association, Having its registe'ed office at Rep. by its Partner 'r/empathi Madhu Vempathi Madhu, S/o. Kanthaiah Aged about 65 years, Occ. President of Surybpet Dist'ict Rice Millers Association Rl/o. Kodad, Suryapet, 508 213 , Telangana Manikanta P;rrboited Rice lndustries, Yadadri District, Bhuva nagiri, Telangana Rep. by its P;rrtner Martha Venkatesham M/s. Vijaya Lakshmi Binny Rice Mill, Yadadri District, BhuvaTagiri, Telangana Rep. by its P rrtner Jilla Venkata Ramana Jilla Venkata Ramana, S/o. Late Veeresham Age. 60 years ()cc. Partner, Fyo. H. No. 1-3-1C,' , Kisaan Nagar, Bhongir- 50Bl 16 Yadadri Rice lndustries, Yadadri District, Bhongir Rep. by its Partner Juluri Ram Mohan

9. Juluri Ram [\tlr:han, S/o. Rajaiah, Age. 44 years Occ. Partr rer, Rl/o. Flat No. 102, Jayabheri Towers, Prabhath Nagar, ChaitanyaPuri Hydr:rabad - 500060 10. Sri Vijaya Durga Parboiled Rice lndustries, Yadadri Dist'ict, Bhuvanagiri, Telangana R,:p. by its Partner Y. Sudhakar Reddy 9

11.Y. Sudhakar Reddy, S/o' Narayan Reddy-.., Age' 69 vears Fl/o' Plot No' 32' Vanasthali Puram, LB N A;;:iiii;;; b;;''iei i-nsan' -- 500070 12.Shiva Sai Mallikarjuna Rice Mill, Yadadri District' Bhuvanagiri' Telangana - nep. OV its Partner S. Narsi Reddy 13.S. Narsi Reddy, Amrutha Reddy,- 4Sg . t9 years Rl/o H' No' 3-126' posanikunta, ffruf<Xapuri'riiAtm-a-k-u?'frrtaiaat, Yadadri District,Telangana l4.Shubhodava Rice lndustries, Yadadri District' Bhuvanagiri' Telangana Rep' Uv iti Partier M. Srinivas Yadav 'utir.tlllx"Js%1xtA%,h""rY,X5'""n'rf"9,?*ur',,il""-'?&'!1""^Jf Diskict,Telangana J;t Krishna l6.RaviKrishnaRicelndustry,suryapet,TelanganaRep'byitsPartnerGunda 17.Gunda Krishna, S/o.-Gopaiah, 4S-"-^9! years Rl/o H'No 1-4-249138/4' " Vt;;;"s;, surYaPet, Telahgana - 5082'13 18.Sri Santhoshimatha Binni Rice Mill' Penpahad Mandal' Suryapet District Rep' '"'Uv it-s pittner Veeramalla Rambabu "yiffA"1[t,5:'i';3xai{"s,"^1,',l3iotPft ,:3rt?fl i#1,]dN,o1-2e0'Gaddi ...WRIT PETITIONERS/RESFONDENTS moration of lndia, Having its regional office at 3rd Floor' HACA 'ff;i; cft;;;Hout, r't"r'.,:plilv] soo oo+' Telansana Rep bv its'

20. Food Co Bhavan, Director Ifi133n,??,:,1_3?,& iXi',:H3[]3:3."",i'.T[fi :.'gl':?:h:3x'L?jl3ifil::'"' ilvi',]|.; tra: s"o"oll d, h;;:;v ;tb V i c"-Cri5l'm a n a nd M a n a g i n g D i re cto r' ,, ...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 passed in lA No l of 2o24inW'P No 15926 of 2024 dld'

01.o7.2024. lA NO: 4 oF 2024 Between: EiBfl AND 1 "9SSS:X'1"4"'iJ:tJ3#&li;e;b%'SBf :f :i,T8:#ils''l?i['&P*'31*'"' ...PETITIONER/RESPONDENT No'2 Yadadri Bhongir District Rice Millers Association'-Havino its registered office o 8 1 t d' D i st ri ct' re r a n s a na a,"L n. I5,s*f,['5ti,["gJs, ifiltii,il- ""',1;,s l0

2. Martha -Venl,:qtesJram, S/o. Late Vasudev Age 58 years, O;c. president Rl/o. 3. Suryapet.District R'ce Miller.s Association, Having its registe red office at Rep. H. No. 3-1-1r15/5D, Vidyanagar, Bhongir - 506i i6, Tetangara by its Partne- Vempathi Madhu

4. Vempathi l\4adhu, Sio. Kanthaiah Aged about 65 years. )cc. president of guryapet Disdrict Rice Millers Associ-ation F/o. Kodad, Suyapet,50B 213, Telangana

5. lvlanikanta P arboiled Rice Industries, Yadadri District, Bhuve nagiri, Telangana 6 Nl/s. Vija,ya Lakshmi Binny Rice Mill, Yadadri District, Bhuva nagiri, Telangana Rep. by its Partner Martha Venkatesham Rep. by its P artner Jilla Venkata Ramana

7. Jilla.Venkata_ lla,mana, S/o. Late Veeresham Age. 60 years r)cc. partner, R/o. H. No. 1-3-1()'l , Kisaan Nagar, Bhongir- S0g1 16 B. Yadadri Rice lndustries, Yadadri District, Bhongir Rep. by its partner Juluri Ram Mohan

9. Juluri Ram [\4r:han, Sio. Rajaiah, Age. 44 years Occ. partrrer, Ri/o. Flat No. 102, Jayabhe.ri Towers, Prabhath Nagar, Chaitanyapuri Hydrrra'bad _ 500060 10. Sri. Vijaya _Durga Parboilgd Eicq lndustries, yadadri Dist -ict, Bhuvanagiri, 'l 'l Y. Sudhakar tleddy, S/o. Narayan Reddy, Age. 69 years Vo plot No. 32, Telangana R{lc. by its Partner y. Sudhakar Reddy Vanasthali Prrram, LB Nagar, Hyderabad, Telangana -'50007 0 l2.Shiva Sai Mallikarjuna. Rice Mill, yadadri District, Bhuvaragiri, Telangana Rep. by its Pirrtner S. Narsi Reddy '1 3. S. Narsi .Reddy, . Amrutha _ Reddy, Age. 40 years R/o. H. No. 3_126, posantkunta, I hukkapuram Atmakur Mandal, yadadri District,Telangana 14 Shubhodaya P,.ice lndustries, yadadri District, Bhuvanagiri, Telangana Rep. Vadav, S{o. Late_ Malkaiah, Age. 57 years R o. H.No. 7_,t67, - yaOaOri Mahatma Candhi Road Bhudan Poc-hampalfi fi8284 District,Telanlrilna by its Partner I\/. Srinivas Yadav

15. M- .Srinivas '16. Ravi Krishna Flice lndustry, Suryapet, Telangana Rep. by it ; partner Gunda Krishna Vidyanagar Srrryapet, Telahgana - 5:08213

17.G.unda Krishn,a, S/o. copaiah, Agq. 63 years Rl/o. H.Nt. 1-4-249t38t4, 'l8.Sri santhoshirnatha Binni Rice.Mill, penpahad Mandal, Suryerpet District Rep.

19. Veeramalla.Rambabu, S/o. Bikshan, Age. 36 years F/o. H. l.lo. .l_290, by its Partner V'eeramalla Rambabu Pally Garedipally lr/andal, Suryapet Dist-rict- 5O'g201 Telangar j -- -' ---- Gaddi ...WRIT PETITIONERS/I.IESPONDENTS

20. Union Of India, Union of lndia Rep. by its principal Secretary, \4inistry of Consumer Aff;r,rs, Food and public Distribution' 21 T-elangana-stale civir Suppries corporation Limited, Havino its reoistered -- -- ottice at 6-3-6!;511lA, Block-B, Civil supplies Bhavan. Somiiiordi Hyderabad -501082 Rep. by its Vice Chairman and lVianaging" lirebtor, ...RESPONDENTS/FIESPONDENTS 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 01-07- 2024 in wP No. 15926 0f 2024 and dismiss the above referred Writ Petition. 11 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 for the Respondent No'3 : SRI T'P'ACHARYA, SC FOR TSCSC W.P.No .19107 0F 2024 Between: S/o. Ramaiah, Age. 53 Years.

1. M/s. Varalaxmi lndustries, Dammakka-pet Village' Huzurabad Mandal' ' firl*rnrgJr-District, 'rE"prei?nteo uv G Mhnaging Fartner' K Krishnamurthv 2. M/s. Sri Durga Traders, C/o DPvi . lndustries' Shamshabad- - - irial,rr.onorr-Manoril-kr-rimnigit 3. M/s. Sri Kanyaka Parameshwari Tppi1g . C^o Keshavaoatnam Village' " !i;"k*p;ftiiMr;d;], 'K;;i;;-".sri q*n"g cr6' eatatrisnha Modern- Rice and Oil Miil, ,"pr"."it"*it 6V Lts trrtinaglng Pirtner, Paladugula Shiva Kumar S/o. Jagadishwhraiah, Age. 55 Years' Village' -oittti"t, rep^resented by its Managing FJrtn"r, At rt" Shashivardan S/o' Rajaram, Age' 33 Years' ...PETITIONERS AND

1. 2 3 4 5 Secretary to. the The State of Telangana, repres-ented by^ its .Principal CJ-n.J'iGiniiuirsl Fo6O a"U'di-*iit S,irjplieJbepartment, Secretariat Buildings' Hyderabad. The Collector (CS), Karimnagar District' Karimnagar' The Telanqana State Civil Supplies Corporation, represented -by it!- yi,c3 Cllzir.?i'xfro'na;;;;d'Di*-,i5[ riiving iis regisiered office at 6-3-655/1/A, e i"ik ii, c,"ii The District Manager, Telangana State Civil Supplies Corporation' Nizamabad District, Nizamabad. Food Corooration of lndia, represented by its Director' having its office at 3rd Fffi;, E"n6;E'h';rIn, Croiicta'oens Ro5d, Nampallv, Hvderabad' ppiiet eiaran, somajisuid a, H vd era bad' -s,

6. The District Manager' Karimnagar. Food Corporation of lndia' Karimnagar District' 12 7. The De.pol ly'anager, Food Corporation of lndia, Buffer I itorage Complex, Korapally Road. Jammikunta, Karimnagar District. .. RESPONDENTS Petition und3r Article 226 of the constitution of India pr:ying that in the circumstances stalerd in the affidavit filed therewith, the Higlr court may be pleased to issue ar order or direction more particularly one in tht nature of writ of mandamus or any other appropriate writ declaring the action o,'the respondent No. 7 in issuing 3 letters in Lr. No. BSC/JMKT/RD(S and R) BRt STACKS/2024- 25, dated 11-07 -2c21.4, to the petitioners directing them to replace the stocks of rice which were dr:rivered by them between 18-03-2024 to 05-05-2024 till the same is replaced tlrr>ir new consignments of stock of rice will no. be accepted, is nothing but arbitrary', illegal, null and void and violative of prin,:iples of natural justice and also violative of Articles 14, 19 and 21 of the con: titution of lndia. consequently set z s;ide the said 3 letters dated 11-ol-2024, thereby direct the respondent authorit r:s No's. 5 to 7 to receive the fresh consignmurnt of the stocks of rice after analy::ing and in case it is found it is in accorcrance with their specifications. lA NO: 1 OF 2024 Petition unde- Section 151 cpc praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed in support of the petition, the High court mal be pleased to suspend the 3 letters in Lr. No. BSC/JMKTiRD(s and R) BRL sTACKS/2o24-2s. dated 1 1-07 -2024, ir;r;ued by the respondent No..7, thereby direct the respondent No's. 5 to 7 authoritios to receive the new consignment of stock rf rice from the petitioners rice mills, in case the same is found on analysi ; as per their specifications. lA NO: 2 OF 2024 Between:

1. Food corpor{krn of rndia,. represented by its Director, having its office at 3rd Floor, HACA Bhavan, public Gardens noaO, ltimpatiy, *VOJri OiO. The District l,r'anager, Food Kaflmnaga r. Corporation of lndia, Karinrnagar District, 2 a The Depot M:rrraqer. Food Corporation of lndia, Buffer Stc.rage Complex, Korapalty Roac, Jammikunta, xafimnigar oisiriiil' --' ...PETITIONERS/RESPONDENTS No'5to7 l3 AND 1 2 a 4 5 6 7 M/s. Varalaxmi lndustries, Dammakkapet Village'. Huzurabad Mandal' K' Krishnamurthy Karimnaqar District, represii"t"'o"'6i S/o. Ramaiah, Age. 53 Years' "ii'ivr"'ilgingFiitner' M/s. Sri Durga Traders, C/o' Devi .lndustries' Shamshabad Village' bv its M anas i ng UiI*: x*,{ru:eilm'rs,rru,,isff '^"":*vg:s h,4/s. Sri Kanyaka Parameshwari Trading C-o- " L(eshavaoatnam Village' shankamatnam Mandal, r'Eiiiii'?g"i o[iii"t' Cto Batakrishha Modem Rice and oil Mill, representeo olitiJ'nlt%?i's'inl Fittn"t' Paladugula shiva Kumar 5)J. .ljgidlsr,*braiah, Age 55 Years' ...RESPONDENTS/PETITIONERS Secretary to the The State of Telangana, represented by its .Princioal consumer Affairs, Food una'Eiur-illiii"ibepartment,'secretariat Buildings' Hyderabad. The Collector (CS), Karimnagar District' Karimnagar' H:,J."1il3ffJir:l',8"3'$,."t"t3-f .";',,i31?."11'l?s.;l"",iffs:'""1*5;t'Xh: Hi"ll"a,'c*ii siibpi6l e"nu""',-Somalisuioa' Hvtlerabad' TheDistrictManager,TelanganaStateCivilsuppliesCorporation,Nizamabad District, Nizamabad. ...RESPON DENTS/RESPONDENTS Petition under Section 151 CPC praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed in support of the petition' the High Court may be pleased to vacate the interim order dated 19-07-2024 in WP No. 19107 of 2024 and dismiss the above referred Writ Petition' Counsel for the Petitioners : SRI K'VENUMADHAV Counsel for the Respondent No'1to4 : GP FOR CIVILS SUPPLIES Counsel for the Respondent No'5to7: SRt DOMINIC FERNANDES' SC FOR FCI W.P.No.1 9159 0F 2024 *T"i[ 185, Telangana uetnl yepjt:ti1"Brx[iJJES:;,?:";,i',e(y]-:":iii:fi3j',1J#]f3:33:il"-"* 2. Manoj Kumar Gaddam' S/o' Late NagabhusianamGadd'fl;|ni K?i"1333; 'HsJii'JH"":s:r'g*lt(Mi"J33llT':'Y"sdB"ies't"t'nsun" (' )' ' 6ll s #$,1,fS *'1"+.*tH:H..ayl'rr,["f"iil8l' ft )s iY ", "'flili'nJl " " 4 Koleti _Satyarara,yana (Withdrawn), S/o.Nagabhushanam Aqe.4B vears. Ucc., Partn( r ot Annapu-ma lndustries P.Jo. 4_3_21Sl,lrll1 , -Bhumnagar, Peddapatte, (arim Nagar -SOS 122, Telangana M/s. Ramaial-r lndustries (withdrawn), Having its office at poosala (v) (M). Sultanabad t)eddapaili- sos tas, iedhsa;; Re'p oVli. pr',ti,i,i sr;i,lolJili r(amaran 14 6 S_am-udrala.llamaiah S/o.Samudrala Shanl,:araiah, Age. 70 ^(Withdrawn), X11I?,9cc lvranaging Partner of M/s. Ramaiah lndustries R/). H. No, 3:2BOt4, Gandhrnagar tjutthanabad, Peddapalli- 505 195, Telangana

7. Mohankrishna lndustries Peddapalli- 505 525, .KomuravelliR erm ulu (Withdrawn), Katnapally (V), {;ulthanabad (M). I elangana Rep, by its Mi rnaging Partndr B K-om-u ravel li I amu lu. (Withdra[1), S/o.. KomuravelliVishwa ratham, Age. 70 years Occ.Parlner of Mohankrishna Industries Ri/o. House trto. S_i+S: Main Road Sultanabad Peddapalli- S05 185, Telangana.- The WP is dismissed as withdrawn insofar as petitione,r Nos. 3 to g is concerned as per C.O.dt. 15.07.2024. ...PETITIONERS AND 1 2 4 Union of lndiz , Rep. by its Principar secretary, Ministry of cor rsumer Affairs, Food and Putrlic gi;s1r;ir1;on [99!_Corpo,rgt o1 of.tndia Having its regional office at 3rd Ftc,or, HACA bnavan, pubtrc cardens Road, Nampally_ S00 004, Telangan a Rep by its. Director Telangana St;rte Civil Supplies gorp_oration Limited, Having il; registered -'- -- office at 6-3_q55/1/A, Stobk-e, Civit'supplies er,irlh, Sor"aiii,uOll Hyderabad-5C,t)082 Rep. by its Vice Chiirman ina rvianagi;iiDir;ttor. Warehouse f\,4anager, Telangana State Warehousing Corporation pEG Karimanagar ...[IESPONDENTS Petition unde ^ Article 226 of rhe constitrition of lndia pra,Ting that in the circumstances statecl in the affidavit filed therewith, the High court may be pleased to issue an appropriate writ, order or direction more pa ticularly one in the nature of writ o'r Mandamus (i) declaring the actions of the r.lespondents in rejecting the delive4'of FRK rice made by the petitioners for crolr year 2023-24 as being illegal, arbitrary, unjust, apart from being unconstitutionar and contrary to doctrine of legitimato expectation and consequenfly set aside tht: same and (ii) consequentry set asire the inspection conducted by the 1st Respc ndent whereby the 1 st Respondenl sought to reject the Lors of ACK's sut.mitted by the Petitioners and alr th er consequentiar actions therein (iii) to furthe - set aside the communication datecr 12.o7.2024 issued by the 4th Resporrdent thereby communicating the r'-'iection to the petitioners as being ifiegar, arbitrary, unjust, l5 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 millerstothe2ndRespondentwithoutanyreferencetotheallegedrejection communicated vide 12.O7 2024. IA NO :, 1OF 2O24 PetitionUnderSectionl5lCPcprayingthatinthecircumstancesstatedin theaffidavitfiledinsupportofthepetition,theHighcourtmaybepleasedto directtheRespondentstoaccepttheFRKricebeingdeliveredbythePetitioner during the crop years 2023-2024 including all the future deliveries without reference to the alleged rejection of the 2nd Respondent' communicated by the 4thRespondentvideCommunicationdated12.OT.2024duringthependencyof the writ petition. tA NO :2OF 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' IA NO :3OF 2O24 Between: FPlBfl ""s:?s:x':"ffjJ:fl ''3'.'s8l:1i,:2T#'f, l3#:1ff :i'J;?,1;H3"1,5,.n"',"', ...PETITIONER/RESPONDENT No'2 AND

1. 2 J 4 *u |U;, Y:fSfllf Sffi,[i#S;,l,::Wi?'(y].:":1!1f, liSj''iJX]'tS:33 3fi 1"' Manoj Kumar Gaddam, .S/o. Late Naqabhushanato*9'P;1n: iffi #l I ;; "F;ffit- oi' t',tti. Veeraaijaneva I 1d y^slr'lgt E5;;i;'"R";;:'Siitt ii''iuao 1rr,t1 eedoapattl- 505 1 B5'relansana Annaouma lndustries Kalvach,erla. (V)' Ramagiri (M)' Peddapally- 505 212' l;ffi-dil Rep. by its Partner Koleti Satyanarayana vears' Occ' Partner of Koleti Satvanarayana S/o'Nagabhushanam '.Age48 Annaourni tndustries Ry"]'?Yi-ii"5ib'EiJ,"6tr"r"nrgdr, Peddapalle, Karim Nagai -sos 17 2, T elangana K?1"1333: t6 5. M/s- Ramaierh tndustries Having its office at poosara (v (M), surtanabad Peddapari- i'05 '185, reransana d"p. oVlii piitnei simuiirrrl'ft#i;;'-""" 6. Samudrala ?.amaiah S/o.Samudrala Shankaraiah, Age 70 years Occ. lVlanaging partner of M/s. Ramaiarr l;;;;i;;" ruol-r. r.rd. l:zaifi Gandhinagar Sulthanabad, eeOaapatti_ SOS f gS, i-ulrnfi*, 7' Motrankrishna rndustries. Katnapaily (V), surthanabad (M) peddapaili- 505 B. Komuravelli Ramulu S/o. KomuravelliVishwanatham, Age. 70 years ia"s, n,l"*, (""b, occ.Partner :f Mohankrishna qqu*iies nro.-H6rs" r.r". Sultanabad F,r:ddapaili- 505 .185, Gingini. '"" 525, Telangarra Rep. by its Mana'ging iritneiXomuraveliiRe,mulu 's ...RESPONDENT S/PETITIONERS Food and Pub ic Distributron

9. Union of lndi:r. Reo. hv its Principal Secretary, Ministry of Co.rsumer Affairs, l0 Telangana-state civir suppries^corp-oration Limited, Having irs registered office at 6-3-e 5;s/1/A, arobk-B, civit'suppriJs a'nriih, so.iii,iuoi -'-'-- Hyderabad-50r)082 Rep. oy iti vice Criii;;;;'fiiN,ia;;si",s 6ir;ttor. 11. Warehouse M,anaoer. Telangana State Warehousing Corpor;rtion pEG Karimanagar ...RESPONDENTS/I?ESPONDENTS Petition unde ' section 151 cpc praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed in support of the petition, the High Court ma1 be pleased to vacate the interim orrer dated 19-7-2024 in wp No. 19159 of 2c24 and dismiss the above referred V/.it petition. lA NO: 4 oF 2024 Between: yll"Er"J,,ifl*,[7.,"!i its principat Secretary, Ministry of Consumer,\ffairs, Food AND ...PETITIONERyRESFTONDENT No.1 1 2 3 4 M/s. Veeraanianeva lndustries, .poosala (V), Sulthanabad (M) r)eddapalli_ S05 185, Tetangahz Bbing represe"t"o uv iG'p6h";;rfi#; Kumar Gaddam Manoj Kumar Cjaddam. S/o, Late NagabhushanamGaddam, Ar;e. years, Occ. Manasino parlrer of rM/s. veeraiffieyi'til;;-tri* R/o. H No. 2_28g. Poosata Road, S uttha na bad (Mi F;dd;;;iti_ sd5"1 sd,i"ransa n l U]i,Tfi]EyL jr) peddapa,,v- sos 21 2, +x,:?B:Ti J:','i'l'il Koleti Satyanarayana S/o.Nao^abhqshanam , Age.4g years, ( )cc. partner of Annapurna tnd:stries ato. q:s_zlilitBri, d6;fi.',irr, pedrtapa,e, Karim Nagar -505 172 Telangana "5ft'Is:[BIL1 17

5. tr/l/s. Ramaiah lndustries Havi Peddapalli- 505 185, Telangana 6. Samudrala Ramaiah S/o.Samudrala Shankaraiah' Age 70- . Ivlanaoino Partner of -tiE. -ii;;aiih lndustries R/oI H' No' 3-28014' cinofinigur. Sulthanabad, Peddapalli- 505 185, Telangana no its office at Poosala (V) (M), Sultanabad Hep. by its Partner Samudrala Ramaiah years^^Orcc' 525, Telangana Rep, by its Managing Partner KomuravelllF<amulu

7. tvlohankrishna lndustries Katnapally {V), Sulthanabad .(M)' Peddapalli- 505 B. Komuravelli Ramulu sio. Komurave,!]iVishwanatham,- 49-e. . .70 years " ii;; P;,ftr or uorranmiJ';; lnar;tn;a Rl/o House No' 3-145' Main Road' Sultanabad Peddapalli- 505 185' Telangana' ...RESPONDENTS/PETITION ERS

9. Food Corporation of lndia, Having its regional office at 3rd Floor' HACA. " bhirr"l Froric caroenlHoit, rulmpativ- 5oo 004, Telangana Rep bv its' Director

10. Telanoana State Civil Supplies Corporation Limited' Having its registered ' " ;ff#""i'6:3:6;tr lA, el"i[-g,-civil'supplies Bhavan, som.ajiguda' . rivi"rLro:siioiiaz hep. uv it's Vice Chairman and Managing Director' 1'l .Warehouse Manager, Telangana State Warehousing Corporation PEG Karimanagar ...RESPONDENTS/RESPONDENTS PetitionunderSectionl5lCPCprayingthatinthecircumstancesstatedin the affidavit filed in support of the petition, the High Court may be pleased to vacatetheinterimordergrantedbythisHon'bleCourtinlANo.l12024inWPNo. 1g15g12o24 daled 23.07 .2024 and dismiss the writ petition in the interest of justice. Counsel for the Petitioners: SRI PASHAM MOHITH counserrortheRespondentNoliiitiu$li=ffits'nnrsa"*^ ADDL.SOLICITOR GENERAL OF INDIA Counsel for the Respondent No.2: SRI DOMINIC FERNANDES' SC FOR FCI Counsel for the Responderit No.e : SRI T'P'ACHARYA, sc FoR TScSc Counsel for the Respondent No.4 : SRI A'PHANI BHUSHAN' SC FOR TSWC W.P.No.19 521 0F 2024 Between:

1. Mis. Sri Laxmi Venkateshwara - -49'.o - lndustries' Gollap'ally- Yellareddipet(M), Rad;;3iri;iira: sosid+, Telangana Rep' bv its P SatYanaraYana Muthala (v), a rtner

2. Sathyanarayana Muthyala, S/o. Muthyala Balaiah, Age. 42 years Partner of rlri Laxmi Venkateshwara Agro Industries F/o. H. No. Racharla Bo:papur. Boppapuram, Karimnagar, Telangana 18 Occ. 7-36, ...PETITIONERS AND 1 Union of lndia, Rep. by its Principal Secretary, tvlinistry of lonsumer Affairs, Food and Pl hrlic Distribution Food Corpo'ation of lndia, Having its regional office at 3rd Floor,. HACA Bhavan, Puhlic Gardens Road, Nampally- 500 004, Telarrgana Rep by its. Director 2 3- Food Corpo'ation of lndia, Nagnur, Karimnagar Rep by 1ts Manager (QC) Neeraja Cornplex Towards Ambedkar Stadium lvlukaramoura, Karimnagar Telangana

4. Telangana Silate Civil Supplies Corporation Limited, Having its registered office at €,-3-655/1/A, Block-B, Civil Supplies Bhav;an, Somajiguda, Hyderabad-S 00082 Rep. by its Vice Chairman and Managinr I Director. ...RESPONDENTS Petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of lndia praying that in the circumstances sta:ed in the affidavit filed therewith, the Hig r Court may be pleased to issue an appropriate writ, order or direction, more particularly one in the nature of writ r;f 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, artritrary, unjust, apart from being unconstitutio ni rl and contrary to doctrine of legitimate expectation and consequently set aside th,: communication dated 10.07.2024 and 20.07.2024 issued by 3rd Respondent rhereby directing freezing of stacks c'elivered by the Petitioner. (ii) declaring the su tsequent actions of the Respondent,; in not accepting FRK rice being delivered t y the Petitioners for Crop Yeat 2023-24 as being illegal, arbitrary, unjust, a part from being u nconstitutiona I and contrary to doctrine of legitimate ()xpectation and consequently direc: the Respondents to accept the future delive'ies of FRK Rice by the Petitionel o the Respondents (iii) to further set asid r: the inspection conducted by the - st Respondent whereby the 1st Respondent sought to reject the LOTs of ACK's s;ubmitted by the Petitioners and all the cons,)quential actions therein, (vi) to furtlrr-'r set aside the communication dated 20.O7.2024 issued by the 3rd Responderrt thereby communicating about the freezing of the stocks to the Petitioners as bering illegal, arbitrary, unjust, apart from being u nconstitutional expectation and consequently set aside the 19 and contrary to doctrine of legitimate IA NO:2OF2024 Petition under Section 151 CPC praying that in the circ theaffidavitfiledinsupportofthepetition,theHighCourtma the Analysis Report conducted on 12'06'2024 including a actions / further proceedings' pending disposal of the present umstances stated in y be Pleased to stay ll the consequential 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 lst Respondent during the pendency of - ^,^+^n the writ Petltion' IANO:3 OF 2024 Between: ,Efl :1,3:p,";f, x%JIJx.o'ft "5'.1',"13"1i1il[19$3'.3T:?"?:d"1i'R:[riP'l ,',-il"#*r*J*r?'";liJs;[xailJl-5"',T,f?3tr$:n":J;i"'y''t"?fl "LT] Telangana AND "'PETITIONERS/RESPONDENTS No'2&3 'Vli,,*3J1,",tffi lh,iY#'3?,iiill'i:i"t8l:'JilltTl3'i'"f "Jf L1'""#J; Racharla Boppapur ';i]ll;llffi ri*ugt*i*H#sfu1ft[*rAn"o"1'n**r'r33; "'RESP.NDENTS/PET'''.NER' secretary' Ministry of consumer Affairs' Hi:TJ"!'Ft3i,ffBi'?J'll3'lrincipar t -1,*:"*:;:l.,,i,ilh:;lr.i.;,*::*,*i#:H:f"til'f, :i"f gj',ri"T ...RESPONDENT'S/RESPONDENTS 20 Petition ur'cler Section 151 cpc praying that in the circrrmstances stated in the affidavit filec in support of the petition, the High court nay be pleased to vacate the interirr order dated 23-07 -2024 in \Np No. 19521 ol 2024 and dismiss the above referrec Writ Petition. lA NO: 4 OF 2024 Between: 1 Union of lndia, Rep. by its principal Secretary, IVinistry o,Consumer Affairs, Food and F'ublic Distritiution ...PETITIONERS/RESPONDENTS No.1 AND 1 2 M/s Sri Laxmi Venkateshwara - Agro lndustries, Gollapally fgllaleddrpe(fi/),. Rajanna Siriciila- S053d4, Tetangana i'lep. OV TG''p satyanarayana Muthala :?tl'yanargy?la. Muthya.ta,. S/o.. Muthyata Bataiah, Ag<. 42 Partner of liri Laxmi Venkateshwara - Agro lndustries- l:Vo. . Racharla Boppapur. Boppapuram, Karimnigar, fetangana H. No. (v), artner Occ. 7-36, 3 ... RESPONDENITS/PETITIONERS Food Corp,ration of lndia, Having its regional office at 3rd Floor, HACA Bhavan, Puhrlic Gardens Road, NJmpattv:soo Oo+,-i"d.rgr;; n6p i,V'Itr. Director 4 [,ggl,9op^,,j-{i9l gf tndia, Nagnur, Karimn.agar Rep by its Manaser (eC) r\eerala uonlprex rowards Ambedkar stadium Mukara-n.,pura, Kaiimn'agar Telangana

5. Te^langana State civil- supplies corporation Limited. Ha..,inq its reqistered office at ,i-3-65s/1/A, biock-B, bivit Supples- arrJ, ,"1 So,iXiidior, Hyderabad-ii00082 Rep. by its Vic6 Cnairman 5fi0 Mrnrginl tiir"i6i.",'"" - ...RESPONDENTSI/RESPONDENTS Petition under section 151 cpc praying that in the circun stances stated in the affidavit filed 'rr support of the petition, the High court m ry be pleased to vacate the interim crder granted by this Hon'ble court in lA No. 12024 in wp No. 1952112024 dated 23.07.2024 and dismiss the writ petition ir the interest of justice. Counsel for the Petitioners: SRt PASHAM MOHITH Counsel for the Respondent No.1 : SRI A.S.VASUDEVAN & SRI K.L.N.RAGHAVENDRA IREDDY, 2l . Assisting SRI B'NARASIMt{A 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 W.P.No.19546 0 F 2024 Between:

1. Saraswathi Rice Tech P!'t Ltd' Ko-lanur (V)'. Konoragpet (M)' Rajanna Siricilla' ' iEii'."dltil'nil. k;v ii; tvtanigihg Director cheeti lndira 2. Cheeti lndira, W/o. Cheeti Narayan Bqg: {S9 56 vears' Occ Managing Director ot Saraswatniiii#'r.,'9r,"6"t Li i tilo. i-s-tott, nnanth Nagar, Siricilla M;;;;i' karimnagar -505301 ' Telangana ..,PETITIONERS 1 Union of lndia, Rep. by its Principal Secretary' Ministry of Consumer Affairs' Food and Public Distribution Efl :1"?:83[i:%,ilsih5,tft%["::PJ:lsb"J.?:f :i"'s,:"'"Th]f 3f .,. Director Food Corporation of lndia, Nagnur' Karimnagar-Rep by its Manager (QC) i{#rj;i;rpi6* ib*Jtal niXu;i rt'ist'oidm rrlu(arimpura' Karimnasar Telangana AND 2 J 4 Ifi [!?ir1f.]3:srixii:8f;ff ";rJ,"'cfi #;'i#ui1u,*$sm'"' Hyderabad-500082 ReP bl ...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 freezingthestacksofFRKricedeliveredbythePetitionersforCropYeat2023-24 as being illegal, arbitrary, unjust' apart from being unconstitutional and contrary to doctrine of legitimate expectation and consequently set aside the communication dated 10.07.2O24 and 2O'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' unjust' apart from being unconstitutionar and contrary to doctrine of legitimate expectation and 22 conSequently direc{ the Respondents to accept the future delivrrries of FRK Rice by the Petitioner tc the Respondents to further set aside the insFrection conducted by the 'l st ResponCent whereby the 1st Respondent sought to reject the LOTs of ACK s submitls6 fry the petitioners and all the consequential actions therein. (iv)to further set aside the communication dated 20.07.2024 i ;sued by the 3rd Respondent therery communicating about the freezing of tlre stocks to the Petitioners as beinJ illegal, arbitrary, unjust, apart from being u n :o nstitutional and contrary to doctrinr; of legitimate expectation and consequen.ly set aside the same. lA NO: 2 OF 2024 Petition undr:. Section 151 CPC praying that in the circurrstances stated in the affidavit filed in :;upport of the petition, the High Court may b,? pteased to stay the Analysis Repcrt conducted on 12.06.2024 including all tlre consequential actions / further prc,r;eedings, pending disposal of the present Wr t peiition. lA NO: 1 OF 2024 Petition under Section 151 CPC praying that in the circum.;tances stated in the affidavit filed rr support of the petition, the High Court nay be pleased pleased to direct ther Respondents to accept the FRK rice being delivered by the Petitioner during tl-r -- crop years 2023-2024 including all the future deliveries without reference kr the alleged rejection of the 1 st Respor dent during the pendency of the writ petition. lA NO: 3 OF 2024 Between: 1 . Food Corporertion of lndia, Having its regional office at 3rd Fk ror, HACA Bhavan, Publ,c: Gardens Road, Nampally- 500 004, Telangara Rep by its. Director . 2. Food Corporat on of India, Nagnur, Karimnagar Rep by its Mz,naqer (eC) Ne.eraja Coml)lex Towards Ambedkar Stadium Mukardmpura Kirimhagar Telangana AND

1. Saraswathi Rice Tech Pvt Ltd, Kolanur (V), Konoraopet (M), iRajanna Siriciila, Telangana Rep,. by its Managing Directoi Cheeti lndiia ...PETITIONERS/RESPOhtDENTS No.273

2. Cheeti lndira, W/o. Cheeti Narayan Rao, Age. 56 years, occ. Managing - Di;;;br;isaraswatniiiice-recrr-FvtLtdR/o i-s-tohiananthNagar'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.TelanoanaStateCivilsuppliesCorporationLimited,'Having..itsregistered "iiJ"'ri'o:s:65tiA, HiiJrlLro:s-oniial iiep. uv iti Vice chiirman and Managins Director. . etobk e, civil supplies Bhavan, Som.ajiguda' . ...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 Vacatetheinterimorderdated23-07-2024inWPNo.19456of2024anddismiss the above referred Writ Petition. IA 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 Pv{ Ltd, Kolanur (Vl Konoraopet (M), Rajanna siricilla, ielangana Rep. by its Managing Director Cheetr lndlra Cheeti lndira, Wio. Cheeti Narayan Ra-o, A^ge-' .19. years' Occ' Managing SiiE}ir'iji'Sirurnrthi Rice rdJn-Fut r-io-rilo. /-s'totti ananth Nagar, Siricilla Mandal, Karimnagar -505301 , Telangana ...RESPONDENTS/PETITIONERS 4 moration of lndia, Having its reqional office at 3rd Floor' HACA d;bil cftffi n"io, ttlrp"tiv- soo oo+, Telansana Rep bv its'

3. Food Co Bhavan, Director Food Corporation of lndia, Nagnur, Karimn.agar.Rep by its Manager (QC) iie"ei"t" i;rrpi6i iowarai n-m'oeot<ar StadiJm Mukarampura' Karimnagar Telangana Telanoana State Civil Supplies Corporation Limited" Having..its registered ;F#""i'o:3:o:-tilA, eloifi-g, civil's u ppl ies B havan, som.ajisld a' iifi;;Ud:5"0:0-d8i h;p. bv it's Vice chiirman and Managins 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. t/2024 in wp No. 1954612024 dated 23.07.2024 and dismiss the writ petition in the interest of justice. 24 Counsel for the Petitioners: SRI PASHAM MOHITH counser ror the Respondent No'1 'Sfl i:i.JA',,%?=^'rfl-B*o o=oo", Counsel forthe 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, Kalvacf,pr!, U), Ramagiri (lr/), pedr apally_ SO5 212, Telangana Rer:. by its Partner Koleti'saiyanaraiani ' Koleti Satyanaraygla, Slg. Nagabhushanam , Age. 48 yean , Occ. partner of Annapurna lrr'lustries No. 4-3-21515/8/1 , Bhumnagai, priddapalle, Karim Nagar -505 1 22, Telangana ..PETITIONERS Union of lndiir, Rep. by its Principal Secretary, Ministry of C onsumer Affairs, Food and PuL'l c Distritiution Food Corporrl.ion of India, Having its regionat office at I rd Floor, HACA Bhavan, Publit; Gardens Road, Nimpally--S0O 004, Telanc:jna nefi OV its. Director Tg^langana State Civil Supplies Corporation Limited, Havir rq its reqistered otfice at 6-3-655/1/A, Btock-B, ^Civjl Supplies Bhava rl Som6;iguOi, Hyderabad-SCir082 Rep. by its Vice Chairman ihd Managing Ciirector. Warehouse lrlanager, Telangana State Warehousing C rrporation pEG Kaflmanagar 2 AND 1 2 3 4 ...]:IESPONDENTS Petition unde - Article 226 of lhe constitution of lndia pra /ing that in the circumstances statec in the affidavit filed therewith, the High court may be pleased to issue an appropriate writ, order or direction, more pa licularly one in the nature of writ ol Mandamus (i) declaring the actions of the :iespondents in rejecting the delivery of FRK rice made by the petitioners for cro t year 2o23-24 as being illegal, arbitr;ary, unjust, apart from being unconstitutiona r 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 daled 12.07 '2024 issued by the 4th Respondent thereby communicatingtherejectiontothePetitionersasbeingillegal'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.O7.2024. IA NO:1 OF 2024 PetitionunderSectionl5lCPCprayingthatinthecircumstancesStatedin 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 dated 12.07.2024 during the pendency of 4th Respondent vide Communication the writ Petition. IA NO: 20F 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 preased 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: F:Bi"%"ilfJi:H":1,'R'ifii,:ilt%d".d;:i"i3L;Jlr.1"J$'lJlBli"xaPoBhavan' ...PETITIONERS/RESPONDENT No'2 AND

1. Annaourna lndustries, Kalvacherla (V)' R'119.'!-!M)' Peddapally- 5O5 212' iijiii'-sliri n"p. bv its Partner Koleti Satvanaravana 26

2. Koleti Satyarr erayana, S/o. Annapurna irrdustries R/o. Nagar -505 ' ',/2. Telangana Nagabhushanam , Age. 48 years, Occ. Partner of 4-3-2151518,11, Bhumnagar, F:'eddapalle, Karim ...RESPONDEN'TS/PETITIONERS 3. Union of lnd'rr, Bep by its Principal Secretary, Ministry of lonsumer Affairs, Food and Put,lic Distribution

4. Telangana Sjlate Civil Supplies Corporation Limited, Ha\ ing its registered office at e4-655111A, Block-B, Civil Suppties Bhavan, Somljiguda, Hyderabad-5Ct0082 Rep. by its Vice Chairman bhd Managin,y Director. '" 5. Warehouse li4anager, Telangana State Warehousing i)orporation pEG Karimanagar ...RESPONDENTS /RESPONDENTS Petition und.r section 151 cPC praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed in support of the petition, the High Court mzry be pleased to vacate the interim o'der dated 23-07 -2024 in Wp No. .lg45B of ,,'024 and dismiss the above referred y'/rit Petition. IA NO: 4 OF 2024 Between: Union of lndia,.Fep Oy its Principal Secretary, lVlinistry of Consurner Affairs, Food and Public Distributi,tn ...P1;:TITIONERS/R-1 AND

1. Annapurna lr clustries, J(alvacherla (V), Ramagiri (lvl), pedc apaily- 505 212, Telangana Rep. by its Partner Koleti Sityanara-yana

2. Koleti Satyan:rayana, S/o. Nagabhushanarn , Age. 4g years, Occ. partner of Annapurna lrrdustries No. 4:3-21SlSlB/1 , Bhumnaga?. prddapalle, Karim Nagar -505 1 'lZ, Telangana ...RESPONDENTS/PETITIONERS 3 Food Corpor;ltion of lndia, Having its regional office at lrrd Floor, HACA Bhavan, Publir: Gardens Road, N5mpally--500 004, Telan-r:ana Re[ Oy iis. Director

4. Te_langana state civil supplies corporation Limited, Havinq its reoistered office at 6-3-655/'1lA, . Biocf-B, Civit Suppties SomEjiqudr, Hyderabad-SCCr0B2 Rep. by its Vice Chairman bhd Managing tiirector- '"-- 'Bhavarl

5. Warehouse Karimanagar [,/anager, Telangana State Warehousing C trporation pEG ..,RESPONDENTS/TIESPONDENTS 27 PetitionunderSectionl5lCPCprayingthatinthecircumstancesstatedin 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' 1g548t2}24 dated 23.o7.2024 and dismiss the writ petition in the interest of justice. Counsel for the Petitioners: SRI PASHAM MOHITH counserrortheRespondentNof iiittutlli=ffiB.nnr."-t*" 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'AGHARYA' SC FOR TSCSC Counsel for the Respondent No.4 : SRI A'PHANI BHUSHAN' SC FOR TSWC W.P.No.1954 90F 2024 Between: Poosala (v) (M), sultanabad 1 . tVl/s. Ramaiah lndustries, Having its office-at . ' i;!"00"'iliii sos r as, iJrlng'rd, R.p. by its Partner samudrala Ramaiah 2. samudrala Ramaiah, s/o. samudrala .shankaraiah. Aqe. 70 years Occ.Managing partner # ft'Vt' n"'Un lndustries R/o H No 3-280i4' u lth a n a b ad, P ed d a p a l l i - 5 0 5 1 8 5' Te l a n g a n a G ;d hi"tg: i "S ...PETITIONERS AND 2 Food and Public Distribution

1. Union of lndia, Rep. by its Principal Secretary' Ministry of Consumer Affairs' ;i',,ffi9!"J8'r3[:?"?i"3:1i'R:[|,f fr I Efl :i,8:F,?;f, X%##'ft Director Telanoana State Civil Supplies Corporation Limited'. Having its registered - biuit Supplie.s. Bhavan' somajisuda' ;F#':i" 6-5:6siiiin,--Eio;x--e, ilv[E u#o-5obd8''r'i;p. ov iis Vicir chairman bhd Manasins Director' ":11"ffi 3

4. Warehouse Manager, Karimanagar Telangana State Warehousing Corporation PEG ...RESPONDENTS Petition under Article 226 oI 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 28 the nature of writ cf Mandamus (i) declaring the actions of thr,l Respondents in rejecting the delivery of FRK rice made by the Petitioners for C-op Year 2023-24 as being illegal, arb trary, unjust, apart from being unconstitutio n al and contrary to doctrine of legitim;rte expectation and consequently set aside .he same and (ii) consequently set aside the inspection conducted by the 1St Res;pondent whereby the 1 st Responde nt sought to reject the LOTs of ACK s r;ubmitted by the Petitioners and all the consequential actions therein, (iii) to furlher set asjde the communication ditl ed 12.07 .2024 issued by the 4th Res londent thereby communicating th€ rejection to the Petitioners as being illegal, arbitrary, unjust, apart from being un constitutiona I and contrary to doctrine of legitimate expectation and cr)nsequently set aside the same and conse<luently direct the 2nd Respondent k) accept the future deliveries of Rice by the Petitioner to the 2nd Respondent w'thout any reference to the alleged rejectic,n communicated vide 12.O7.2024. lA NO: 2 OF 2024 Petition undr:r Section 151 CPC praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed in r;upport of the petition, the High Court may b,r pleased to stay the Analysis Repc rt conducted in June, 2024 including all the consequential actions further proceredings, pending disposal of the present Writ Petition. lA NO: 1 OF 2024 Petition underr Section 151 CPC praying that in the circum stances stated in the affidavit filed in support of the petition, the High Court m:ry 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 d,:liveries without reference to the alle'ged rejection of the 2nd Respondent, comrnunicated by the 4th Respondent virl,: Communication dated 12.07.2024 during the pendency of the writ petition. lA NO: 3 OF 2024 Between: Food Corporation Public Gardens Ro lndia, Having its regional office at 3rd Floor HACA Bhavan, Nampally- 500 004, Telangana Rep by its. Di-ector 29 ...PETITIONERS/R-2 ANO 1 2 Bll';05#lll'33,'i3ld:T':,:.5lfJlfl J[:'",1i'"S'11'fS'"S3'f, J'V} !t\k::[li'o* Samudrala Ramaiah, Slo' Samudrala .Sl'un91ui*b. 19"*"1% /fo1ll 3 :; H', ffij? g]*fl xl r lJ ffi a #i[1t[ [g: +TE'nn, n u ..'RESPONDENTS/PETITIONERS ry of Consumer Affairs, FooO and Public Distribution 3 Union of lndia, Rep by its Principal Secretary' Minist - l38n"Jl"3l3l3r3iil!,"Bi,l'""-'-':"3f-'1,'i:"-&t'frJli' iiv'i5.rfjo-So"otitii n"p ov iiJ Vlc6 chairman and Ma Havino its registered 'Bhavanl Somajiguda' naging Director. Telangana State Warehousing Corporation PEG

5. Warehouse Manager, Karimanagar ...RESPONDENTS/RESPONDENTS Petitio n under Section 151 CPC praying that in the circumstances stated in filed in support of the petition' the High Court may be pleased to WP No. 19549 of 2O24 ;lnd dismiss the affidavit vacate the interim order daled 13-07 -2024 in the above referred Writ Petition' IA NO: 4 oF 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 5 HltoSrTii'33u'l8t','+'3,:"5iJlfl Jf fli:i':'-fs'"s'"'sJ'"J'!r\k;:Hf 'o'o Samudrala Ramaiah, S,/o Samudrala .Sf'Llll'i*b 11"*"1% /ffill gh Silaql'.,,?fl xl 3t,,:1 ffi #Sattt [g:?TB'nn' n' ...RESPONDENTS/PETITIONERS fr I Ef; :t"S:tsff ft :%##'ft "ill',llg;i'"ffe3,i3',sT:?#f#i'R""'6ff Director Ift [s':i,'E:ils,Fld:Bfl :"f F::8iirt""+;#:H:"'{il;fr ,,::i$"fi Hyderabad-500082 ReP bY Warehouse Manager, Telangana State Warehousing Corporation PEG :l?1 Karimanagar ...REsPoNDENTsi/RESPoNDENTS 30 Petition und,-'r Section 15i cpc praying that in the circun stances stated in the affidavit filed ir suppo( of the petition, the High court mny be pleased to vacate the interim rrder granted by this Hon'ble court in lA No.. 12024 in wp No. 1954912024 dated 23.07.2024 and dismiss the writ petition i'r the interest of justice. Counsel for the Petitioners: SRI PASHAM MOHITH ""' ro *h e Re s ponde n'[ N o 1 1" i*ld$fi,'$ffi=ft lii' ffit Counsel for the Respondent No.2: SRt 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.pHANl BHUSHAN, SC FOR TSWC W.P.No.19555 OF 2024 Between:

1. fi/ohankrishne lndustries, Katnapally (V), Sulthanabad (lvl), 525, Telangana Rep. by its MandginA pa'rtner komuravetii (i 2. Komuravelli i-.amulu,. S/o. Komuravelli Vishwanatham, Occ.Partner cf Mohankrishna lndustries Rio. l-iouse No.3_. Sultanabad Perjdapalli- 505 .195, Telangani Peddapalli- 505 m ulu Age. 70 years 45, Main Road, ..PETITIONERS AND

1. 2 3 4 Union of lndia Rep. by its principar Secretary, Ministry of con sumer Affairs, Food and Pub i : Distri'bution Food Corporation of lndia, Having its regional office at 3rd Flo;r, HACA Bhava n, Pubtir; Gardens Road, N-ampatiy_ SOObO+, fef anga n, i R.b ty its. Director Te^langana Statr: Civil Supplies gorp_oration Limited, Having its registered 9.ffi9e al 6-316f s/1 /A, arobk-e, Civir'Supfiries Bn]rah, SorZiig rdai - - Hyderabad-50r)C82, Rep. by its Vice Cn'iirman JnO VJnagii{ Diieictor. Warehouse Marrager, Telangana State Warehousing Corporalion, pEG Karima nagar ...RESPONDENTS Petition under ,Articre 226 of rhe constitution of rndia praying that in the circumstances state(r in the affidavit fired therewith, the High court may be 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 rejecting the delivery of FRK rice made by the Petitioners for Crop Yeat 2O23-24 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 conducted by the 1 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 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 Co Bhavan, Director rooration of lndia. Havinq its reqional office at 3rd Floor, HACA Public Gardens Road, N-ampali-y- 500 004, Telangana Rep by its. ...PETITIONERS/R-2&3 AND 1 2 Mohankrishna lndustries, Katnapally (V), Sulthanabad (M)' Peddapalli- 505 525, Telangana Rep. by its Managin(; Partner Komuravelli Ramulu Komuravelli Ramulu, S/o. Komuravelli Vishwanatham, Age. - -70 years Occ.Partner of Mohankrishna lndustries Rio. House No. 3-145' Main Road' Sultanabad Peddapatli- 505 185, Telangana 'P#?1#tiii'5iln,?[,',?,irinciparsecreta;ff :::J3rT:tf#ilfJ,:* 32 . l#ii:;..j#ir#"rl{iiflq,"."ffi i[*,## li,qtfr rfbff:,:. t [4;a na ge1 Telan ga na state wareno usii g co rpo r a tio n, eee ["?ffi:"":tn", ... RESPONDENTS/RESPONDENTS petition unde - Section 151 cpc praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit fired in support of the petition, the High court mal, be preased to vacate the interim or.cler di in wP No '19555 of 2(24 anddismiss the above referred *,r,, r"1,1i"1r"-o7-2024 IA NO:4O F 2024 Between: y,#f#,,'Jflt,[:i;*q, its principat Secretary, Ministry of Consumer r,ffairs, Food AND

1. 2 ...PETrTloNERS/R-l *i*:i!:L"x:T,ffi :i.Ti*?#UAyH:,,[ixiglt[k#,i,,.apa,i.505 $;t"#:"#r,"i1l#,r, j["*T:fr[dy ffi a,. a! :,r,? d8:f ;l'Jl.'* 3!#"ff rn:T;?rsrrslyft%h::ff 'Ef,

4. T-e_langana State ()i, ''Fg#*ffi t fi x#s;..,.,.,*_{r*f i:."i,#rnir,,*,###qx*ft ,,'gil.i,* [r?ffi:"":E i\4a nalver, Telan ga na state wa reho using co rporatio n, pEG petition under sectrr the arridav r r "u n .,p1,,,'l::ii?:J::iT:i ;':::,IilJffi"::::J ,; vacate the interim order llranted by this Hon,bre co',"rt in rA No.1r2o24in wp No. "'REsPoNoENTs/REsI':oNDENTS 33 1g555t2o24 daled 23 'o7 '2024 and dismiss the writ petition in the interest of iustice. Counsel for the Petitioners: SRI PASHAM MOHITH counserrortheRespondentNolilrttu$H+ffi'ffiiit"fu ^ Counsel for the ResPondent No'2: SRI DOMINIC FERNANDES' SC FOR FCI Counsel for the ResPondent No'3 : Counsel for the ResPondent No'4 : SRI T.P.ACHARYA, SC FOR TSCSC SRI A.PHANI BHUSHAN' SC FOR TSWC W.P.No.196 14 oF 2024 Between: 34 1 2 AND

1. 2 J 4 A33a3f,'j[1/1i.,fl:1!3:3y'ft:,ilffisfs:lylr#ri:,a:i:Jp, Rajanna sirici,,a- gflsT#i,i,fr3:,,*,'.#Jr,ff iI"f Sy,if %ffi Ii%.:fl [:si"i: ff fi P,i"?l,?'Jtilili 5ffi.l,r,oli,l,{'"cipar secretary, Ministry or cor sumer Arrairs, ...PETITIONER 5f, :l#,"ffi i:t"#lg.Jix,1t,R%h::pJ:83f "#?:f :,:ti:ll!"h#8,x* Food Corporation of lndia. I isEi11"#'+itiStf l,lii,tu[?y,iJ,li5l3u??,ff JHi?y.",;L:31, nf,fl':l::i{d'fu"dJ:::s#ff";[f']r*n ul:ffi {ftH:- "ft%];f ...TIESPONDENTS Petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India pra,,,ing that in the circumstances state J in the affidavit fired therewith, the High court may be pleased to issue an zrppropriate writ, order or direction more particurarry one in the nature of writ of Mandamus (i)decraring rhe actions of the F,respondents in freezing the stacks or l=RK rice derivered by the petitioners for crog yeat 2023-24 as being illegal, arbitr ary, unjust, apart from beirig unconstitutio na I irnd contrary to doctrine of legitimate erxpectation and consequenfly set aside the < ommunication daled 10.07.2024 and 20.o7.2024 issued by 3rd Respondent the reby directing freezing of stacks delrvered by the Petitioner. (ii)declaring the subsequent actions of the Respondents irr not accepting FRK rice being delivered by the petitioners for Crop Year 2O23.:24 as being illegal, arbitrary, unjust apa t from being unconstitutional and contrary to doctrine of legitimate exp ectation and consequently direct ther Respondents to accept the future deliverie,; of FRK Rice by the Petitioner to the Respondents (iii)to further set aside t re inspection conducted by the 1st fiespondent whereby the 1st Respondent sc,ught to reject the Lors of ACK's submitted by the Petitioners and all the conseqrrential actions therein (iv)to further sr:: aside the communication dated 20.07.2024 issued by the 3rd Respondent thereby communicating about the freezing of the stocks to the petiti6ners as being illegar, arbitrary, unjust, apart from being unconstitutional and contrary to doctrine of legitimate expectation and consequently set aside the 35 same. IANO:2O F 2024 Petition under Section 151 CPC praying that in the circ the affidavit filed in support of the petition' the High Court ma the Analysis Report conducted on 12 06'2024 including a actions/furtherproceedings,pendingdisposalofthepresent umstances stated in y be Pleased to staY ll the consequential Writ Petition. IA NO:1 OF 2024 Petition under Section 151 CPC praying that in the circumstances the affidavit filed in support of the petition,. the High Court may be p direct the Respondents to accept the FRK rice being delivered by the during the crop years 2023-2024 including all the future deliverie reference to the afleged rejection of the 1st Respondent during the pe stated in leased to Petitioner s without ndencY of the writ Petition' IA NO:3OF 2024 Between: ""T'5fl Director :g,?:E3;i:"d,"*S'Jhgl:'l,n'f J,:flJ:BSb"Jd"^:f :l,',!""$h5i3i'"

2. Food corporation gll,ii,fu Neeraja Complex I o Telangana XXfl33l#'3gt?,?,i'ff 1"?J.l";JHilSfll93}' "'PETtrloNER/R'2&3 Siricirra- |[;.3i11!"1s]L5,l"fJ:B:B'J'ft: *flX8PB:lYL#ti:'flxflllyl,Raianna Sandupatla Rajireddy, S/o. Narayan Reddy' Age 42 years' Occ'Partner of 'M'-iold+' Yettareooipet' Kishandaspet' Sapthasiri Rice lndustrres Fi6. tl' Kaiimnagar' Telangana Union of lndia, Rep by its Principal Secretary' Ministry of Consumer Affairs' Food and Public Distribution ...RES'.NDENT'/'ET',.NER AND 1. 2 3 - jffig?He",a3:&r"4ptif b:'""#i'.:fi xfltTxll?l;lst,;g,ltilresistered Hyderabad-50r)082 Rep. ov it! Vt'J!-Cri*liriri, l"o Manasins.Direbtor. 36 ...RESPONDENTS/RESPONDENTS Petition unde.Section .l5j CpC praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit fired in support of the petition, the High court ma).be preased to vacate the interim oder dated 23-07 -2024 inwp No. 196.r4 0f 2(24and dismiss the above referred M/rit petition. IA NO: 4 oF 2024 Between: 1 Union of lndia, Rep bv its pr l_ood and public Distribut;o jin.iOrl Secretary, Ministry of Cons rmer Affairs, AND

1. , ...Pt,TlTlONER/R-i fl ::3a l" gL fl:133 :sl, f;s Ailsru: lyl#fi yft?iiip R,ja n na s irici,,a- ff ilfi fu ,:Tjfixl'*.3,"#.i.ff i5"f BIaf ',"",[',"t?1;';,'',f 3n:fl [:il"i:

2. Food Co Bhavan, Director ff ili:?i,?lg,J?J,11,ft%i"r::flr,:ssf "#?:f :;;i:iTI,#ff ,. ...RESPONDENTS /PETITIONER

3. Food Corporatio r of lndia, Nagnur, Karimnaoar |"Tl?i-".,.*iE,iio*,,.ain^io"oiiiSiliilH^f,%:JJf #:ltl,?ll:8],. 4 Telangana state oivirsuppries gorp_oration Limited, Having its re qistered office at 6-3-65s/1 A, Brobri_e,-c,v,i'Suiiii"r'ri'illrun, Somaiioud i Hyderabad-5000,3 2 Rep. ov itb Vile-Cri5;;;;Iiil";;siffit l;.,.. ...RESPONDENTS/REIiPONDENTS Petition under Ser;tion 151 cpc praying that in the circumstan:es stated in the affidavit filed in support of the petition, the High court may br,r preased to vacate the interim orde'granted by this Hon'ble court in lA No.1l2o24 in wp No. 1961412024 daled 23.t)r.2024 and dismiss the writ petition in th* interest of justice. Counsel for the Petitioners: SRI PASHAM MOHITH 37 *' ro r the Re s po n d e nt N o 1 "' " ii*ttu$gt*i"m:'r m^ | Counsel for the Respondent No'2&3: SRI DOMINIC FERNANDES' SC FOR FCI Counsel for the Respondent No'3 : SRI T'P'ACHARYA' SC FOR TSCSC W.P.N o.19621 o F 2024 '"T"il;. venkata Sai Rice, 1"9.!'l'1"-'i ^.cJl:3pfsfl g M' Kari mnasar- "}/r'fl' ;3'fi 3l"lil'"1;l#l?: 'i','*il:"rl.$:iti1"frp"9;'e"Elt,,r,g:t'l'xi3fi Telangana-505001 "'PETlrloNERs AND 1 2 I lnion of lndia, Rep. by its Principal Secretary' Ministry of Consumer Affairs' fooO anO Public Distributlon *:ts:pgts"?:xLttgt'tn'li,5flJ:BStJ'"f Director f Ll"s':f:hli3i'" 3 4 Telangana ..,RESPONDENTS l,::lr*Enl:l illxi,.s Jffltua,[?'s,#'fl fll $i?i'y,h]ii:?g?lJP:J"' ffi ;!,1H'..:j3.EJf,xls,fx,"#fl ":ij,:,}f, I!i.:fl i?i#i{ffx'rEJf il::* 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) decraring the actions of the Respondents in freezingthestacksofFRKricedeliveredbythePetitionersforCropYear2023-24 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'O7'2024 issued by 3rd Responderit 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 u nconstitutiona I zrnd contrary to doctrine of legitimate consequenfly direct the Respondents to accept the future delive by the Petitioner b the Respondents (iii) to further set asid conducted by the .1:st Respondent whereby the 1st Respondenl the LOTs of ACK,s s;ubmitted by the petitioners and ail the cons therein. (i) to further set aside the communication dated 20.07.2C 3rd Respondent th,:reby communicating about the freezing of t Petitioners as being illegal, arbitrary, unjust, apart from being unc contrary to doctrinr; of legitimate expectation and consequen| same. 38 expectation and ,ries of FRK Rice e the inspection sought to reject ,lquential actions 24 issued by the 're stocks_ to the :nstitutional and y set aside the IA NO:2 OF 2024 Petition under Section 151 CPC praying that in the circums ances stated in the affidavit fired in s upport of the petition, the High court may be preased to stay the Anarysis Reporr conducted on 12.06.2024 incruding a, the consequentiar actions / further proceedings, pending disposal of the present writ retition. IA NO: oF 2024 1 Petition under srection '151 cPC praying that in the circumstrrnces stated in the affidavit fired in s 'rpport of the petition, the High court may be preased to direct the Respondents to accept the FRK rice ueii derivered by the petitioner during the crop years 2023-2024 incruding a, the future deri,,eries without reference to the alleged rejection of the .l st Respondent during th( ) pendency of the writ petition. IANO:3OF2 024 Between: 1 Food Corporatio r of lndia, Having its regional office at 3rd Floor HACA pubric o,rrdens Roao, r.l"ampariy- 5ob oij;;iil.gana r,:ep btits. Bl]B:il) I !3:?"i""9"""#isltf :'|]iJ8.yfl r:![?'gl#?fl fi :R#ffi y3:ft1;#s,%, Telangana ...PETITIONERS/R-2&3 39 AND 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 Mis' Venkata Sai Ricti lndustries No.7-1-69012, Mankammathota, Karimnagar, Telangana-505001 2 ...RESPONDENTS/PETITIONERS

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

4. Telanoana State Civil Supplies Corporation Limited, Having its registered officeit 6-3-655/1/A, Btobk-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. 19621 of 2024 and dismiss the above referred Writ Petition. lA NO:4 OF 2024 Between:

1. Union of lndia, ReP. bY Food and Public Distrib its Principal Secretary, Ministry of Consumer Affairs, ...PETITIONERYR-1 AND 1 M/s. Venkata Sai Rice lndustries, Choopadandi V and M, Karimnagar- SOS+1 S, Telangana Rep. by its Partner Bommena Sandhya Bommena Sandhva, Wo. Gopal Rao , Age.47 years, Occ Partner of M/s' V"iliiitl sai-n[tj industries'N o.7 -1 -690i2, Mankammathota, Karimnagar, Telangana-505001 2 ... RESPONDENTS/PETITION ERS

3. Food CorDoration of lndia, Havinq its regional office at 3rd Floor, HACA - bnir"n, FrbficbarOens Road, Nimpally- 500 004, Telangana Rep by its' Director

4. Food Comoration of lndia Nagnur, Karimnagar Rep by its Mang-ger (QC) Neeraja Complex Towards Ambedkar Stadium Mukarampura' Kanmnagar Telangana

5. Telanqana state civil supplies corporation Limited, Having.its registered - om"eit o:s-ossltln, etobk-e, Civil'supplies Bhavan, Som.ajiguda, . HvoJrioio-sboo82 Rep. by its Vice Chairman and Managing Director' ...RESPONDENTS 40 Petition under llection 151 CPC praying that in the circumslances stated in theaffidavitfiledins;upportofthepetition'theHighCourtmaybepleasedto vacate the interim order granted by this Hon'ble Court in lA No 1/:1024 in WP No' 1962112024dated"|"3.OT.2O24anddismissthewritpetitionintheinterestof justice. Counsel for the Petitioners: SRI PASHAM MOHITH counse'ifor rhe Respondent No l ilis,:*slttHB.rni,Tfi*l ADDL.SOLICITOR GENERAL OF INDIA Counsel for the Respondent No'2&3: SRI DOMINIC FERNANDESii' SC FOR FCI Counsel for the Respondent No'3 : SRI T'P'ACHARYA' SC FOR ISCSC W.P.No. 19630 0F 2 024 Between: 1 Vavuoutra ln'lustries, Kothapally (V), GambhiraoPgt (M)' ' 50d56;,'i"iJ,igininep. bv its P'artner Pariiatha Pathuri Pariiatha Palfruri, W/o. Kishan Reddy, Age 46.y.e V;;L;,jt* inclustries R/o.6-1 1/16/D, Kothapallv (v) Rajanna Siric I'a- 505304, Telangana 2 llajanna Siricilla- ars. 3cc. Partner of , Ga nbhiraoPet (M), ...PETITIONERS AND 1 Union of lndia, ReP. bY Food and Pubric Distrib its Principal Secretary, Ministry of Cortsumer Affairs'

2. Food Corporitlion of lndia, Having its re - Ahavan, Pubri,: Gardens Road, Nampal oional office at 3rd Fl,ror, HACA iy- SOO OO+, Telangar a ReP bY its 3 4 Director Food Coroorirtion of lndia, Nagnur, Karimnagar-Rep by its fVl"lnager (QC) ii;;;j';i;;ii"i ibwitai Arfruedkar staditrm Mukarampura ' Karimnagar Telangana Telanoana S.ate Civil Supplies Corporation Limited,, Having. ts registered .iiJ"'"I o:s:,;svr lA, elo6[-8, civil'supplies Bhavan' Som.aji Suda' . t-iyd;;Ui-5b-ode2 hep. bv iti Vice chairman and Managinl: Director' ., RESPONDENTS Petition under Article 226 of the constitution of lndia praying that in the circumstances staled in the affidavit filed therewith, the Higll court may be pleased to issue an appropriate writ, order or direction. more particularly one in the nature of writ cf l\rlandamus. (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, unjust' apart from being unco nstitutional and contrary to doctrine of legitimate expectation and consequently set aside the communication dated 10.07.2 024 and 20'07'2024 issued by 3rd Respondent thereby directing 4l freezingofstacksdeliveredbythePetitioner.(ii)declaringthesubsequentactions of the Respondents in not accepting FRK rice being delivered by the Petitioners for crop y ear 2023_24 as being iilegar, arbitrary' unjust, apart from being unccjnstitutional 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, uniust, apart from being unconstitutional and contrary to doctrine of legitimate expectation and consequently set aside the theLoTsofACKssubmittedbythePetitionersandalltheconsequentialactions IANO:1OF 2024 Petition under Section 151 CPC praying that in the circumstances the affidavit filed in support of the petition' the High Court may be p direct the Respondents to accept the FRK rice being delivered by the during the crop years 2023-2024 including all the future deliverie reference to the a[eged rejection of the 1st Respondent during the pe stated in leased to Petitioner s without ndencY of the writ Petition. IANO:2OF 2024 Petition under Section 151 CPC praying that in the circumstances s the affidavit filed in support of the petition, the High court may be pleased the Analysis Report conducted on 12'06'2024 including all the conse actions / further proceedings' pending disposal of the present Writ Petition tated in to staY quential 42 lA NO: 3 OF 2024 Between:

1. Food Corporrtion of India, Having its regional office at 3rd Fl:or, HACA Bhavan, Public Gardens Road, Nampally- 500 004, Telangana Rep by its. Director

2. Food Corpor,rtion of lndia, Nagnur, Karimnagar Rep by its lVranager (QC) Neeraja Con prlex Towards Ambedkar Stadium Mukarampuri r, Karimnagar Telangana AND I Vayuputra lr'clustries, Kothapally (V), Gambhiraopet (M), Rajanna Siricilla- 505304, Tela ngana Rep. by its Partner Parijatha Pathuri Parijatha Pathuri, W/o. Kishan Reddy, Age. 46 years, Occ. Partner of Vayuputra lrrdustries R/o.6-11116/D, Kothapally (V), Gzrmbhiraopet (M), Rajanna Siric illa- 505304, Telangana ...PETITIONERS/R-2&3 ...RESPONDENI S/PETITIONERS ? Union of lndia Rep. by its Principal Secretary, Ministry of Co rsumer Affairs, Food and Pu:lic Distribution

4. Telangana Slate Civil Supplies Corporation Limited,, Having ts registered office at 6-3-ti55/1/A, Block-B, Civil Supplies Bhavan, SomajilTuda, Hyderabad-S )0082 Rep. by its Vice Chairman and lvlanaging Director. ...RESPONDENTS/ RESPONDENTS Petition unde,r Section 151 CPC praying that in the circumr.;tances stated in the affidavit filed irr support of the petition, the High Court ma y be pleased to vacate the interim order dated 2310712024 in W.P.No. 19630 of 2024 and dismiss the above referred rA/rit Petition. lA NO: 4 OF 2024 Between: Union of lndia, Rep. hry its Principal Secretary, Ministry of Consumer Affairs, Food and Public Distributir; r AND 1 2 Yqyyputq ln,lustries, Kothapally (V), Gambhiraopet (M), l,lajanna Siricilla- 505304, Telangana Rep. by its Partner Parijatha Pathuri Paruatha Palhuri, Wo. Kishan Reddy, Age. 46 years, )cc. partner of Vayuputra Irdustries No.6-111161D, Koth-pally (V), Ga nbhiraopet (M), Rajanna Siricilla- 505304, Tetangana ...P[iTITIONERS/R.1 ...RESPONDENTI}/PETITIONERS Efl :1f,:E:[?:t$LXoJ?X,1']tn"h'pXPJ:BSbf'?:f Director 43 :lJ*"''S:hli3'i"' f,:""1r*E*ti3l iifi]tu t?Hi:; -5F 3utx"'i"ff,l'?I*EJf i?3ffi193]' Telangana 3 4 5 ffi !i:,8.,:;.,.?f#l:iHsijff "ii:f.}i}!l"iHti#uh;H,;rs€'*.'"' ...RESPONDENTS/RESPONDENTS petition under section 151 cpc praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit fired in support of the petition, the High court may be pleased to vacate the interim order granted by this Hon'ble Court in lA No 1/2024 in WP No' 1g630t2024 daled 23'07'2024 and dismiss the writ petition in the interest of justice. Counsel for the Petitioners: SRI PASHAM MOHITH :""'"'rortheRespondentNolill'itl$t+t*i'm:'im^ Counsel for the Respondent No'2&3: SRI DOMINIC FERNANDES' SC FOR FCI Counsel for the Respondent No'3 : SRI T'P'ACHARYA' SG FOR TSCSC W.P.N o.197230F 2024 Between: rrr/s Sri Dhanalaxmi lndustries ill"'i"!lrtt"o uv its Managing Ale. 34 Years. F:Hi[?:3"?"5:',.?',"ft{ll.Hfl"f 's[lo$lB'.JX'B'"{}t', ...PETITIONER AND 1 [::.:H:?^?fal:'ilg3Boto.iir.'r"JxEfl ""o"Jl"nt#"'f Hyderabad. 31"?""31?j?g to the uildings,

2. The Collector (CS), Peddapalli District' Peddapalli' ;hTt-titfi'''1tr?!'$;H+isir:;fi%[:iis"'il:g{ris:*"1r]'. its Vice 655/1/A, f \J t li:i;:i:'J:1Jffi". relangana state civir Suppries corpr ration, peddapaili 44 ' Fi"?l ?"igx ?l L?ll l ?ll*i, l% :?::lF* j#:"_*?:,,n 6 The Divisiorrar Manaoer, Karimnagar, _- istrict Kairmnagar. _Food corporation of rndia, l)ivisionar office, h a v r s itsoo ffi ce a t 3 rd ::

7. The Warehorrse fVlanaor r<Irir"r'g:ri, ii't?i,lfrrlijrtfirJ;:1:n""' state warehousins corporation, PEG- ...RESPONDENTS Petition unde r Articre 226 0f the constitution of rndia pr:rying that in the circumstances stat.ri in the affidavit filed therewith, the High Court may be pleased to issue an c rder or direction more pa,.icurarry one in the nature of writ of mandamus or any olher appropriate writ declaring the action of the respondent No. 7 in issuins Lr No TSWC/pEG_KNRyRD (S and R) BRL Stack/2024_25, dated 12-07-2024, kr the petitioner rice mi, directing to reprace ,^e stocks of rice which were derivererl by them between og-o5-2024 to 17-05-2024ti, the same is replaced their new ccnsignments of stock of rice wi, not be acce rted, is nothing but arbitrary, irregar, ru, and void and viorative of principres of nat rrar justice and also violative of Artic,:s i4, 19 and 21 of the Constitution of lndia Consequen,y set aside the said retter dated 'r2-o7 -2024, thereby direct ,re respondent authorities No's 5 tc 7 to receive fresh consignment of the stocr,:s of rice after analyzing and found ir accordance with their specifications. lA NO: 1 oF 2024 Petition under liection 151 CPC praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit fired in s Lrpport of the petition, the High court may )e preased to suspend the tetter No. TSWC/pEG_KNR/RD (S and R) BRL StacW2O24-25, issued by the respor,rient No. 7, thereby direct the respondent No,s. 5 to 7 authorities to receive the new consignment of stock of rice from the cetitioner rice mill, which is found on ernalysis as per their specifications. lA NO: 2 oF 2024 Between: 1 #,3:'J:i:B!,llik]Y,?l;,Eood corporation or rndia, Divisionar orrice, 2 The warehouse Manager, Terangana state warehousing corporation, pEG- *;it"'"ls;r' karimnagar District' .PETITIONERS/R-5&6 45 AND ,| M/s. S ri Dha nalaxmi I ndustries' S u lthanabad Pto.P-"j 5i."t,i;i.' i"iiiJ"nt"o bv .its Managing Partner' uugvz IVladhava Rao, Age. 34 Years' '1ild Sfl f,3!r'&::'n.7l: ...RESPONDENTS/PETITIONER 2 rhe State .el re9!9qTir,3?Jf,'.",ffifl"3'r.'l',-t"l5i1,t8l"%"319rj?H,i3'.3.1 Consumer Affairs, I-ooo Hyderabad. The Collector (CS), Peddapalli District' Peddapalli' 3 4 5 6 E[lru+--*l-.,.ld"tfl,f lfiiliids"s#'s'?s:':t'P.r;E'x)"^: The District Manager, Terangana state civir Suppries corporation, Peddapalli District, PeddaPalli' Ei"%l?"iB"ii'f, l,:llB,13i,:%:?:""1'sfl 3JJ:"-?ll?ifl J;[?X:g[:o:*""""'o ...RESPONDENTS/RESPONDENTS 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 vacate the interim order daled 24-07 -2024 in WP 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.N o.199460F 2024 Between: rrir/s. Vararaxmi Agro lndusrries, rndaram Viflage,,Jaipur Mlandal. Mancherial District' represented bv its uanasrri;t;'tffi' G'R;;fi'd"i h;"'3Y;' Lbiman Rao' Age 54 Years ...PETITIONER 46 AND 1 2 3 4 5

7. The State of Telangana, consumer Afr;rirs. FoSd ",ia Hyderabad. . represented by its principal S:cretarv to the cirir s,ip'pri". b"pirtiiJri.t!"irlriild,iiii.iiil The Collector (OS), Mancherial District, Mancherial. The Telangana State Civil Supplies Corporation, represenr.ed by its Vice Chairman and tulanaoino Dlr^"-*"^i rrjying.ils.resfti'"di;+i;;i o:i 6'dvi,,I_I Block B, Civit S upptie-s Biavan, SomaiigutJ, iyd"rJnio The District Ma,naoer. Telangana State Civil Supplies Corporalion, Mancheiral District, Manch e ria-|. Food Co.rporatrc,n of lndia, represented by its Director, having its office at 3rd Floor. HACA B r ava n, puotic caroeni nJjo, i rairi,"r'iiv, Hvo"[ tjao. The Divisionar lvanaoer Food corporation of rndia, Di'risionar office, Karimnagar. Di ;trict Kaiimnagar "' I[?r,3,1.,r,., Manager, Food Corporation of tndia, Karimnagar proper and ...R[:SPONDENTS Petition under Articre 226 of the constitution of rndia prayrng that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit fired therewith, the High ( )ourt may be pleased to issue an o'crer or direction more particurarry one in the nature of writ of mandamus or any oflr':r appropriate writ decraring the action of ftre respondent No. 7 in issuing Lr. rr.. FC|/FSD/ MNCL/BRL/2024-2s dated 12-0,-2024, to the petitioner's rice miI dirr:cting to reprace the stocks of rice which wer > derivered by them between 23-o4'iro24 to 2r -04-2024 ti, the same is reprac ed their new consignments of stock ,:f rice wifi not be accepted, is nothing but arrritrary, iflegar, null and void and vio ative of principres of naturar justice and arso viorative of Articles 14' 19 and 2 ot rhe constitution of rndia. conseguenfly set aside the said letter dated 12/0r"2t024, thereby direct the respondent authorities No,s. 5 to Z to receive fresh consir;rment of the stocks of rice after anaryzing and found in accordance with their s frecifications. lANO:1O F 2024 Petition under Sr::tion 1s1 cpc praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit fired in suprport of the petition, the High court may b,r preased to suspend the letter No. FC|/FSD/ MNCL/BRL/2024-2s dated 12-7-20t4, issued by the respondent No. 7, thereby direct the respondent No.s. 5 to 7 zruthorities to receive the new consignment of stock of ricb from the petitioner's rice mill' which is found on analysis as per their specifications 47 IA NO :2OF 2024 ""T"?l;o corporation of lndia' represented by,its*Director' having its offlce at 3rd Floor, HACA anauani'b"u[lic"6"i!'"i n"6u' Nampallv' Hvderabad' 2 The Divisional Manager' Food Corporation of lndia' Divisional 'Office' -' Kiiimnagar, District Karimnagar 3. The District Manager' Food Corporation of lndia' Karimnagar Proper and District. ...PETITIONER/R-5TO7 AND 1. HL',;Yf 1*H!ft3'.'Jliil'lf,:tu$SisT'XJll%:'d3y##il'f Rao, Age.54 Years' 's'Y:i:lil?l 2 The State of Telangana' represented by il;r;il;; Rffairs, Fo6d and civil Supplies D Hyderabad. ,..RESPONDENT/PETTTIONER ":l'"*t#"TSL"?;'31'?i?8,i3'',T'i

3. The Collector (CS), Mancherial District' Mancherial' -I[:*Hit9fi x.1,:l'"Ef.l":{l{i#a1f*:, ii{'.sFsT?t'p.I.'3',Yi"^: 5. The District Manager, Terangana state civil suppries corporation, Mancheiral Block B, Civil SuPPttes t District' Manchenal "'RES'.NDENT./RESP.NDENT' 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 vacate the interim order dated 01-08-2024 in WP No' 19946 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 Respondents No'3&4 : SRI T'P'ACHARYA' SC FOR TSCSC Counsel for the Respondent No'5to7: SRI DOMINIC FERNANDES, SC FOR FCI W.P.No. 20506 oF 2024 Between: 1 . M/s. Sri Tu asi District - 501t525 Reddy Modem Rice Mill. Kachaour (V), Julapa Ii (M) peddapalli , Tetangana Being repres'enreb ljv rr,trrr, -iG"FI.in5i'ku,ioj' 2 Kandi Malla teddy, S/o. Rajireddy, Age M/s- Sri Tul;:si Mbdem Ric-e Miti ny6. Peddapalli D strict - 505525,Telanmna -59 2-7 yea_rs, Occ- Ma naging partner of 4, Kachapur,Ju apelly Mandalam 48 AND 1 2 J 4 ...PETITIONERS Secretary, Ministry or co rsumer Arrairs, Pubtc: Gardens noao, rlirirpJiyli;ob-oij+Iflrr"gara Rep by its. H,i"".l,?,tJ?,'riii,5ffn,?,rol',t"?|.'"cipal Food Corporertion of lndia Having its regional office at 3rd Fkror, HACA BilS:il1 Telangana St,:te Civil Suoolies^Corp_oration Limited, Having it; registered office at 6_3-65 5/1 /A. eroti(_e, giyi il_q;;6#'nri!h, Sorr;i, .,ra, Hmiera bad-S(r0082 Rep. ov itb ViCe-CriJ;;;; ;;;iril;r rirm Jirector. }V^u_1. glo_1:" l\r1 a nage r, Tela nga na S tate Wareho usi ng Coa pe r,; io n pEG Kanmanagar ...ItESPONDENTS Petition unde' Article 226 of the Constitution of lndia pra,Ting that in the circumstances statec in the affidavit fired therewith, the High court may be pleased to issue an ;rppropriate writ, order or direction more particurarry one in the nature of writ oJ Mandamus- (i)decraring the actions of the l,respondents in rejecting the derivery of FRK rice made by the petitioners for crolr year 2023_24 as being irregar, arbit-i1ry, unjust. apart from being unconstitutiona r and contrary to doctrine of regitimate expectation and consequenfly set aside the same and (ii)consequenfly set i:side the inspection inspection report condu(.ted by the 1st Respondent whereb),the 1st Respondent sought to reject the t.OTs of ACKs submitted by the peti:i,rners and a, the consequentiar actions there n-(iii)to further set aside the commrrnication dated 12.o7.2024 issued by the 4rh Respondent thereby communicatirr' the rejection to the petitioners as being iI,:gar, arbitrary. unjust apart from being unconstitutionar and contrary to doctrin€, of legitimate expectation and cons erquenry set aside the same and conseque,rry direct the 2nd Respondent to €rocept the future deriveries of Rice by the r)etitioner rice millers to the 2nd Rr-'spondent without any reference to the arerged rejection communicated vide 12 IZ .2024. IA NO :1 OF 2024 Petition under Section 151 CPC praying that in the circumst theaffidavitfiledinsupportofthepetition,theHighcourtmay direct the Respondents to accept the FRK rice being delivered b during the crop years 2023-2024 including all the future de reference to the alleged rejection of the 2nd Respondent' comm 4th Respondent vide Communication daled 12'07 '2024 during t the writ Petition. 49 ances stated in be Pleased to y the Petitioner liveries without unicated bY the he PendencY of IA NO:2OF 2024 Petition under Section 151 CPC P the affidavit filed in support of the petitio the Analysis Report conducted in Jun actions / further proceedings' pending di raying that in the circumstances stated in n, the High Court may be pleased to stay e, 2024 including all the consequential sposal of the present Writ Petition' tANO:3O F 2024 Between: FPi"bfl ""SPS:""'I"""'J"il3,X?X'lnu'6'o'S8l:e,:TrT#8:,"Ti?l;HEABtavan' ...PETiTIONER/R.2 AND 1 2 J 4 5 i',1l: ''# Bli,;,i',ilHHr#?:i#nflT#nf;[1BH#)d,'I]'8'."'li..yu;"''ft sli'*fi :fff [l*:i/laltit+:|:udtff#:txL#:'1?o1'ft';';'9i"*'y'iffi ...RESPONDENTS/PETITIONERS Union of lndia, Rep. by its Principal Secretary' Ministry of Consumer Affairs' Food and Public Distribution Telanoana state civil supplies caRporation Limited, Having.its registered tgr,,3l*:;t1zir-:f "'l;li",H:Tri,|fi'"R:x'f il,',""T#1ts?,0"?., Warehouse Manager, Telangana State Warehousing Coapersion PEG Karimanagar ...RES'.NDENTS/RES'.NDENTS P6tition under section 151 cpc praying that in the circun.rstances stated in the affidavit fired ir support of the petition, the High court m ry be preased to vacate the interim :rder dared 31-07 -2024 in wp No. 20506 0f ,r.024 and dismiss the above referred Writ petition. 50 Counsel for the petitioners: SRt PASHAM MOHITH .lounsetrortheRespondentNo'1ifl,tiytl,"J$x'ximrt:?r^"*r^ ADDL.solrcrroR GENERAT oiir,6in- Counsel for the Respondent No.2: SRI DOMINIC FERNANDES, SriC FOR FCt Counsel for the Res,pondent No.3 : SRI T.p.ACHARYA, SC FOR ISCSC Counset for the Respondent No.4 : SRI A.pHANl BHUSHAN, SC rgp Tgyy" W.P.No. 27766 0F 2024 Between: 1 2 AND

1. 2 3 4 ;ft i;6{giigffi;f ;l'lil+t,,}t::*q,+."f,i*ii{,,,'ffi fff il,i*q"#iFa,$?T"fl dq#p1:i;rt#;f f Jl:,fliirsffi ...I:)ETITIONERS Union of lndia, Flgp by its principal Secretary, Ministry of Consr mer Affairs, Food and Public Distribution, New Oeifri. Food Corporatio r of lndia, Having its regional office at 3rd Floor HACA Bhavan, Pubtic oardens Roao, ru"ampariy _ srjo ijbZ llirnsrni i"p 6t its. Director - - '' Assistant General Manaoer, Food Corporation of lndia Having itr. regional office at 3rd Ftoo. uncA enavjn F;dii; G;;;; iiolo, r.raipl rrv-_tootoa, Telangana Telanqana State Oivil Suoolies gorp_oration Limited., Having its r -,gistered office at 6-3-655/ i /A, etobk-e, civii's^ufipties e hiii,i,' 6omrlgro r, Hyde ra bad- 5000,3 2 Rep. uy it3 ViCe-Cri5i;; ;'u;iiilr;"s i n g D i r :cror, ...RESPONDENTS 51 pleasedtoissueanappropriatewrit'orderordirection'moreparticularlyonein 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 the nature of writ of Mandamus i' declaring the actions of the Respondents in issuing Communication dated 05 08'20 24 bearing no F' No' 42-2I2O24-QCC and Communication dated 01 '1O'2024 bearing no RO TL-270038'0/1/2023-PROC- R0 TL (E 97949) purportedly reiecting 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 03'2023 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 direct the 2nd Respondent to forthwith follow the procedures contemplated under Standing Operating Procedure (SOP) notified vide Communication dated 15.O3.2023,including the appeal procedure / mechanism provided therein' IA NO: 10F 2024 Petition under Section 151 CPC praying that i the affidavit filed in support of the petition' the High the Communication dated 05 08 '2024 bearing no' Communication dated 01 10 '2024 bearing no RO RO TL (E 97949), including all the consequential pending disposal of the present Writ Petition' n the circumstances stated in Court may be Pleased to stay F. No. 42-212O24-QCC' the TL-27.0038.0/'1 I2023-PROC' actions / further Proceedings' Counsel for the Petitioners: SRI PASHAM MOHITH Counsel for the ResPondent No'1 i:*ttu$l+t*i'm:,1m, 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 IiTAO IVRIT PETITI ON Nos.l 5889, 15 926, tgt 07, 19159. 1,)521 19546 19548 19549 19555 t9 614. L9621, 19630, t97,i3 19946 2O5O6 and 27766 of 2024 COMMON ORDER: H eard NI r- Pasham Mohith, learned coun sel for r re petitioners 1! 548, 19549, in W.P.Nos.tt;889, 15926, 19159, IgS27, 19346, 19555, 1961t, 19621, 19630, 20506 and, 27766 cl 2024, Mr K.Venumadha.,. learned counsel for the petitioners in W. r.Nos.19107, 79723 and 19946 of 2024, Mr. B.Narasimha Sharma, learned Additional Soli:itor General of Indja assisted by Mr. A.S. Vasudevan and Mr. K.L.N. laghavendra Reddy, appearing on behall ol respondent No. I Union of India and Mr. Dominic F.ernandes, learned Standing Counsel appea:.ing on behalf of Food Corporation ol Ind ia (for short 'FCr).

2. In all the se writ petitions, the petitioners ha,,,e qut stioned the action of the rt:r;pondents in rejecting the delivery ot. F.< rtified Rice Kernels (hereinz lter reierr ed to as .FRK,) supplied by the petitioners for [he crop year 2023-24 and sought consequenttal <iire:tion to set aside the inspe<:1ion conducted by respondent N.. 1 on ,s.o4.2024, 26.04 .2024 an I 29.O4.2024 and also rejecrrng tl re lot of Acknowledgmenl s submitted by the petitioners, ancl seelring to se t 2 aside the communication orders issued by respondent Nos.1 and 3 declaring as Beyond Rejection Level (for short 'BRL') 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. a Brief facts of the case: 3.1 For the facilitY of reference, are being referred to iacts from W.P.No. 15889 of 2024

3.2. According to the petitioners, petitioner No- 1 Assoctatron was registered under the Telangana Societies Registration Act' 2OO1 and it consisting various rice mills situated in Nalgonda District' Telartgana State. The petitioner Nos.3, 5, 7, g, 1'1,13 are the rice mills' which are situated in Nalgonda District and they are engaged in the business of supplying riie to respondent No'2' In the year 2022 ' tl:,e Government of India with an intention to improve the quality of rice' introduced the scheme of fortifrcation of rice, whereby Fortified Rice (FR) would be supplied through the Targeted Public Distribution System (TPDS)' Accordingly, respondent No l had issued Operational Guidelines dated, 73.12.2022 on Quality Conlrol for FRK and Fortihed Rice' As J per the sai( Operational Guidelines, all the rice mille rs are obligated to blencl F R { u,ith Custom Mi,ed Rice (for shorr ,CMR,) in the ratio of i:100 b_v us,rrg an automatic blending machine in orde: to ensure that the blending rlrocess takes place in an efficient manner 3.3 The pr,litioners further averred that they are srrictly following the Operatiorral Guidelines issued by respondent No. I r,,hile supplying FRK to respr rrdent No.2. Accordingly, respondent No.2 had accepted such delivene s rn the year 2022 without ralslng ary objections However, in -)re year 2023, respondent No.l rejectcd the deliveries made b1- rhe oetitioners after lapse of long perioci of tirne through communicatic n dated 06.06.2023 alleging that thc F RK were not blendecl u.ith rhe CMR in the lmr reciiately, the petitioners h e.ve submitted 1t.O8.2023 to respondent No 2, stating that respondent authorities accepted the supply of thr stocks made by the petitioners zrltel r:onducting thorough inspr:r:tion and after lapse of long penod, thcy are rejected the deliveries c n the alieged ground that FRK were nor ;lendecl with the CMR in th,) prescribed ratio. Unless the stocks strp pLed by the petitioners are accepted, they will be put to great irre; arable loss. They further s _:rted that the alleged deficiencies in the nulritional value of FRK c tnnot be attributed to the petitioners sir: ce FRK are procured by the cetitioners from the third parties/agencie;, who have representation on prescribed ratio 4 been authorized by respondent No 2 to suPPtY FRK and therefore' anY deficiency in the nutritional value of the 'FRK is attributed to such third parties/ agencies onlY'

3..4 They further averred that basing on the rePresentatlon submitted by the petitioners and similarly situated rice millers' respondent No 2 and Federation of A1l India Rice Millers Association had brought the above said facts to the notice of respondent No 1 and convened on 18 08.2o23 During the accordinglY, a mee tlng was in order to enslrre transparency' it was course of the said meeting, agreed upon that SOP dated 15 03 2023 notihed by respondent No 1 shall be revised. As per the revised notiltcation' FRK will be checked for the level of micro nutrients in fortilted rice by gathering the samples in the presence of rice millers and State Government agency' Thereafter, the petitioners have submitted another representation on 1L.Og.2023 requesting respondent No l to resolve the issue pertaining to rePlacement/ rejection of FRK'

3.5 TheY further averred that on 26.12.2023 resPondent No' 1 notified 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 from rice millers fails on account of blending' an opportunity shouid I ) be given to r hc rice millers to bring biending ratio oi t he rejected stock within the Prescribed limits or alternatively by add ng conventional FRK in F-R, .r by adding conventional rice in fortified ric:e, so that the blending ratio in the fortified rice becomes acceptal le As per the revised SOp ,jated 26.12.2023, respondent No.1 ought to have verified the b.le nd in 3 ra tio and if the ratio is witlrin the p rescribed limit, delivcry of F. lK can be accepted

3.6 It is further averred that in the month of March t.nci Aprit 2024, the petitione;.:; once again made deliveries of FRK to rcr;pondent No.2. After conduc,tng a thorough mechanized check up, re;pondent No.2 has acceprcd r.he same without raising any objections. Thereafter, on 25.04.2024, 26.04 .2024 and 29 .O4.2O24, responde rt No. I had purportedlv d:puted a team to inspect the food storage depots under resPondcnt Nc.2 and calling upon the Executive D ircctor, Food Corporation o t India, Zonal Office, South, through co mrnunication dated 1 I.06.2U24 to take appropriate action for the stoc ks that have been declared :r s BRL

3.7 The petir ioners further averred that respondenr No.3 issued notilrcatton on lB'06.2024 intimating the petitioners tha! the stocks delivered Li_v th : m for the year 2023_24 have bee n re.Jec _ecl and the same was alregcc I-r' BRL and further directed the petitioner s Lo replace 6 the BRL stock with fresh stock Aggrieved by the same, the petrtloners have hled the present writ petitrons 4 Respondent No- 1 filed counter-affidavit denying the averments made by the petilioner s inter aliocontending thal the Department ol I.ood and Public Distribution (for Short "DFPD") have established food grains to policies to ensure the delivery of high-qualitY stakeholders are required to fotlow the SOP beneficiaries and all guidelines. A meeting was held on 18'O8'2023 with members of The Federation of Rice Millers Association' during which' the SOP dated 15.O3.2O22 was discussed' The Federation requested the concerned rice m,rers be present during the sampring of royo ol [he 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 eieven Quality Control Cells under the DFPD, with headquarters in New Delhi and regional offices' In Telangana, rice procurement is calried out by the State Government (under the Decentralized Procurement Scheme) and the Food Corporation of India (FCI) (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 procur3ment operations for the State Government and Food Corporation o - India as per the approved budget.

4.1 It is furt-rer averrsd that the quality of the lortifi,rd rice stored for distributio i through pDS/other welfare scheme s a tlam of DFPD conducled insp:ction of various FSDs (Food Storage Dcp(,t) uncler FCI, Khammam anj Nalgonda Districts w.e.f. 03.05.2023 to Og.O3.2O23 along with F CI zrnd State Government officials. During tt e rnspection, the sampling v,irs done as per the ISO (lnternational org anization for standardizar_ior ) norms titled as .,lndian Standards C IREAL AND CEREAL PRODUCTS SAMpLiNc (IS I48IB:2C|.7)". There was compretely unb:rsed serection of stocks made at random, afl,er carefur examination of the stocks. The samples were drawn and seized during thc cour-se of inspection and they were anal) zed in the laboratory of DFpD nnder the Ministry of Consumer Alfairs, Food & Public Distribut ion in the presence of respondent No.2 and State Government ofl crials and they were not purposively tat geted to a particular rice rrilier. As rhe DFpD is the hnal/appellate authority, there is no provir;;on for the reanalysis of the samples.

4.2 It is also ar.crred that the redressal mechanism i.e., the appeal procedure as mertioned in the writ petition is applicable cnly during the time of procrt rement/acceptance of the stock. As the inspection 8 conducted by the officers of the Ministry is a routine activit5z, the appeal procedure does not apply to the present case. It is further averred that there is no provision for involvement of rice millers at any stage of inspection conducted by the officiais. Moreover, the presence of concerned rice millers is not allowed in order to maintain the conlidentiality ol the entire process and to avoid any undue influence on the inspecting officers.

5. Respondent No.2 hled counter affidavit wherein it is stated that respondent No.1 had issued Operational Guidelines dated 13.12.2022 on quality control for FRK and lortified 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 ratio of 1 : 1OO.

5.1 It is lurther averred that the Quality Control Cell (eCC) of the Department of Public Distribution, Government of India, conducts 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 specifications setup by the Government of India, as ou[lined in letter No. FCI He QCO12(i 1)/2/2O23-QC, with reference to the details of inspection, 9 sampling, arr(l analysis procedures for the procuremer t of paddy and the acceptar r:e / purchase of ricc stocks. ln this context, all 14 stocks checked by lr'.inistry are accepted on AGA (Automatic r lrain Analyser) for quality p lrameters at the time of receipt. Hon'eve r, 13 stocks, have been manu a lly analysed in respect of FRK as per SOP of FCIHQQCO2g lll2024 QC dated 15.02.2024, and 1 r;tock has been analyzed by a Ge machine in respect ol FRK.

5.2 It is also averred that all BRL stocks con.municated on

06.06.2023 l-ave been replaced by the concerned rice millers during the last ] (:ar. As per the respondent no.2 letter No.HQ- QCO 12(1 1) I tl I 2O23-QC, BRL stocks identified duri rg subsequent inspectio:rs should be immediately replaced and the ;tocks must be verified by -he AGM (QC) of the concerned Divistor al or Regional Office. Accur-rulating of BRL stocks in Depot premis es may not be allowed, as it adversary affect the storage and effect on stocking of fair average quu lity and potentially disrupting the Pub ic Distribution System, ani in case parties do not lift the rejecled lo s/consignment within 24 hours, they may not be allowed tr; dump their consignmen -:;. An action will be taken against the con;erned miller in accordance with the instructions contained in tt e office letter No.QC/2(1)/ O6-07 lKharit specifications, dated 07 .OA.2CO7 . l0

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 further averred that the bleeding ratio of FRK refraction should be in between O.9o/o to 12o/o rnandatorily 'The 14 stocks checked by respondent No.l were found BRL in terms of blending ratio of FRK which was on lower side i.e., 0'58% to 0'87o and on higher side btending ratio was l -3%o to 1.72o/o. lt is further stated that any higher and lower percentage of FRK or variation in blending ratio prescribed by the Government of India O.9o/o to 127o will not supply optimum dose of micronutrients (Vitamin 89, Vitamin B12, and lron).

5.4 The appeal procedure is applicable only at the time of acceptance, which follows a three-level process. The hrst Ievel is with the Assistant General Manager (QC), the second leve1 is with the Deputy General Manager (QC) of the Regional Office, and the final level is with the Central Grain Analysis Labouratory, Ministry of Consumer Affairs, Food, and Pubtic Distribution, Government of India. The Central Grain Analysis Labouratory serves as the appellate laboratory for testing physical parameters in food grains such as jowar, millets, and others for various wheat, rice, paddy, bajra, procuring and consuming agencies. However, the respondents reque.stin-B replace the stocks as per existing guidelines' -\---

6. Mr. I)asham Mohith, learned counsel for t he petitioners, submitted tlrat the pe[i[ioners rice millers are engaged in the business of custom nrilling of rice and supplying the rice to rt spondent No.2 In the year ito22, ihe Government of India introduceC a scheme for the fortifica,.ion of rice to improve its quality, ensui-ir rg that fortihed rrce 1s supolied through the TPDS in accordance ,rril-h guidelines framed by respondent No.2. As per the Operatic na.l Guidelines notified by r erspondentNo.2, all the rice millers are ob igated to blend FRK with CL4R in the ratio ol 1:1O0. The petitioners celivered FRK to respondent 1tro.2 in March and April 2024, and after r:onducting a thorough m:chanized check, the stocks were accept rd without any objections

6.1 He fu:iher submitted that a surprise check r;as conducted, without comrnunication or intimation to the petitioner:;, on the stocks lying witlr r<::;pondent No.2. On 11.06.2024, thc QC() of respondent No.2 reportr:,i to the Director that during the insp:ction of three depots, tota. 55 rice samples were collected, and out rf it, 14 stocks were declar:d as BRL. It was recommended that the stocks be replaced as rer procedure and liquidated only after ver ihcation by the DFPD team. The surprise check conducted by the officials of respondent I'1o.2 is contrary to thc SOP, t2

6.2 He further submitted that on lB '06'2C,24 ' 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 rrre l 25ok FRK shows as BRL' while the other 13 had minor FRK percentage variations due to handling On the very same day, the petitioners requested the Commissioner of Civil re-examine / re-analysis the samples' Supplies, HYderabad' to request for re-analysis has not been However, the Petitioners' considered.

6.3 He further submitted that QCC team had drawn samples' without issuing nottce and opportunity to the petitioners and without and even without complaint from any conducting on-the-sPol analYsis have not followed the mandatory individuat. The resPondents On O5.08.2024, the Petitioners procedure as completeci under SOP requested the respondent No 2 to re-examine the samples the same was not considered the same However,

6.4 He also submitted that the petitioners urged that the procedure for fortihed rice samples was not followed correctly' as the initial analysis was not conducted within the prescribed time The checking been completed within 24 hours and any process should have rejection shotrld have been conveYed within one week of dumPtng, 13 especialll, u,hr:, the respondents have conducted surpr ise checks in the absence o'any complaints or grievances is not per[ issible under

6.5 He also r;ubmitted that on 26.09.2023, rcspondt nt No.2,has issued guidelirLr:s for sampling and analysis procedure t I tre followed in procuremer 1 of paddy and acceptance/purchase or rice stocks during Kharif nrarketing season 2023_24. As per claus< 9, samples will be drarvn jointly with State Government represent rLive by the technical assir;:ant for the purpose of anaiysis lc determine acceptabilitl, of the consignment as per th I uniform spe cification / S( ) p. Hor.never, Clause Nos.l2 and l7 u.ere -roL followed and Clause No.:23 states mandatory checks and quality cc ntrol teams should conduct l;urprise checks with reports critically exr mined. He further submits r,hat ISO regulations for cereals anrl ltulsr s sampling were adopted b.r the Bureau of Indian Standards. As p:r the SOp dated 15.O3.20II], there is a provision of appeal mechar,ism under Clauses 3 and 5 He furiher submitted that the responden Ls have not communicated t_te report to the petitioners and also nor p rovided an appeal mechanisnt exists at the time of acceptance of stor:k.

6.6 He furthet Submitted that on 12.Ot.2O24, respor dent No.2 introduced enhe-nced quatiry control measures using ar r Al-based l4 automated gtain analy:zer' 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 disruPttons

6.7 He further submitted that the appeal procedure for Forti{ied Rice, as per Government of lndia's 2023 guidelines' mandates drawing three sealed sample s at the timc of stock acceptance in the presence of ofhcials and any stocks later identified as BRL must be replaced by the rice millers. He further submitted that respondent No'2 in its |eLter,uideRoTL-27.oo38.o1|l2o2g-PRoC-RoTL(E97949)dated Ol .1O.2024 , clearly stated that the re 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 the proper guidelines while conducting the surprise check and aiso 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; t5 1 Mahavir Rice and General Mills v. State of l.runjab r 2 Eas,t. India Commercial Co. Rrt. Ltd. v. Central board of revenue, Delhi2

3. M/s;. Sankambari Rice Industry, Bargarh and ors v. UOI (W.P (c)No.28ZoO of 201221 7 . Mr. K Venumadhav, Iearned counsei lbr tf e petitioners, submitted th rt the stocks were received by respondent No.2 from the petitioners frrrm 18.03.2024 to OS.OS.2O24. On the s€ me day, tests conduc t:d and accepted them, as per guidelir es issued by respondent I.l l 2. But, later, on 7I.O7.2024. the respondents conducted a l;rrrprise check, without issuing any notrc(, and passed order stating that the said stocks are BRL and requesred to replace the same, Ther:fore, the same is gross violation of.princi tle of natural Justice.

8. Mr. B.N. Sharma, learned Additional So.licitor Ger eral of tndia appeari.g lor the respondents, submits that w.p.Nor,. r5gg9 and 15926 of 2024 should have been dismisscd for mis_joincl:r of parties, as the impugnt:d order dated 7g.06.2024 appheci onll to six rice millers directir.lJ them to replace the BRL stock u.rth fresh stock. Similarll', w.P. t{o. 27766 of 2024 fired, by the assocration should also r2O2t ' 1972 SCr'O lrne Del I tl SCC ontifle p&fi I )31 l6 be dismissed, since separate writ petitions had already been filed 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 fortihed rice blended at the correct ratio of 1 gm. of FRK per 1O0 gr' of CMR by conducting random checks with 40 lakhs metric tons o[ paddy sampled at a l Oa/o rate' He further submitted that any initial rejection at delivery only allows a remedy of appeal is available ' 8.2 He further submitted that surprise checks were conducted by the Centrai Government team along with the officials of respondent No.2 and Civil Supplies Corporation' There are 30 rice millers hled *.it p"titio.," from Nalgonda and Karimnagar Districts' Hence' the writ petition hled by the Association i e ' W P No'27766 of 2024 questioning the very same procedure is not maintainabie and the same is abuse of Process of iaw'

8.3Healsosubmittedthatperiodicchecksandsurprisechecks were condq,qted as per the Operational Guidelines on quali[r control t7 for FRK and FR, dated 13.72.2022. Later, revised SOI was issued on 26. 12.2023 n order to maintain the quality of I,_RK r rnd FR and to provide good quality FR to the beneficiaries and a, the stakeholders are advised t.) cnsure strict compliance. of accepting the appeal the stagl DFPD and

15.03.20:3, decisions made ty failing to meet tire are 11 quality control cells in New

8.4 The app,62l mechanism applies only at CMR zrncl not subsequent inspections. On procedure for. fortified rice samples FSSAI norms rvas established. The referral or appellate labs are final and cannot be questioned by any stakeholders 8.5 He furt;rer submittecl that there under respon Jent No.2 S&R Division tasked with ensuring foocL grain quatity during procuremcnt, storage and distribution. l.hese cells conduct periodic and surprisc r:rspections at various locati,rns and fs16ql3te policies and SOps for quality management. itn 26.O9.2023, respondent No.2 had issut d guidelines lor inspecting :Lnd accepting rice stocks during 2023_ ZO24 Kharrf season. Accorcing to the said guidelines, the stocks identified as BRL on subsequent inspection should immediately be got rcpJaced by the concerned rrce rriller and the replaced stock should ir variably be verified b1. the .\GM (eC) and BRL stocks cannot be accrrmulated in respondent No..2 Depots and in case the rice m lers do not lift the Dclhi, 18 rejected consignment within 24 hours, they may not be allowed to dump their consignment' As on the date of inspection' 14 rice miiiers in Nalgonda and t6 rice millers in Karimnagar were instructed to replace their stocks' though none were rejected' and some rice millers were already replaced the s[ock Hence' the relief sought by the petitioners rejecting the delivery of FRK is not true and correct' 8.6 The rice miliers association frled W'P No' 27766 of 2024 and the same is not maintainable under law on the ground that association is not an aggrieved parly' especially the affected parties/ aggrieved parties have already writ petitions Learned Senior Counsel further submitted that the impugned proceeding issuecl by the respondents dated 15'O3'2O23 is valid and repiacing stocks does not equate to rejection' The respondents after foliowing Operational Guidelines and SOP, directed the petitioners to replace the fresh stock and the technicar 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 petidoners are not applicabte 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 thereln l9

8.8 In suplort of his contention, he relied upon the j rdgment of the Hon'ble Ape>. Court in Jayant Verma v. Union of Inr{ia3. The said judgment emF)hasizes the importance of adhering to thr principle that general icgrslttive entries should not be interpretcd in,r manner that undermines ;pecific entries in the line with the ma.> im ,,generalia specialibus n<n d'eroganf. The principle is cruciaj in pr esent case as it highlights t re necessity of the following operational Guidelines and SOP strictlv 9 Mr. Dorninic Fernandes submitted that the manul;Lcture of FRK and iortified r r:c requires a blending ratio test q,ithin the limit of 1:100, :rs pcr L 1c procedure outlined in the SOp. Clau ;e 2. 1 states that FRK mar.rrfacturers must have an FSSAI license /registration and the blendinrl ratio should range from O.9 to I.2. The:.e are stages of quality manirllement protocols of FRK and fortified rict:, which are Stage I : As ]t,:r the quaiity management protocols fc r FRK and fortified rice drLted 26.12.2023, the vitamins and mine.als premix (VMP) usect rrru st compl),. with FSSAI guidelines, and ma rulacturers must obtain a ,lertilicate of Analysis (COA) from laboratories, u,itrch for .,erihcation. QR code Manufacturers lrrust maintain batch-wise records of thf COA and premx used for eLudtt trails accessible to authorities. In S age 2, rice ' (2O 18) 4 SCC 7.+3 should include a FSSI rl-approved 20 millers biending FRK with conventional rice must procure FRK from FSSAI-licensed suppliers, use a blending machine as per BIS standards,andensurehomogenousblendingatiTobyweight'Quality checks should be performed through hourly blending efficiency tests' and records must be maintained' Periodic and surprise checks by DFPD are mandated, as mentioned in the letter dated 1 l'06 2024' which also requires periodic checks of pDS quality. These guidelines, formulatecl by the Department of Food and Public Distribution on 13.12.2022, are to be strictly adhered to by al1 stakeholders to ensure high-quality fortilied rice for beneltciaries' with immediate effect' prescribed inspections. the appeal g.l He further applicable at the FSSAI, iS submitted that the appeal mechanism is only stage of accepting CMR and not for subsequent As per the order of respondent No 2' dated 15'03'2023' rice samPles found BRI' as the procedure for fortified DFPD, Government of India' and norms issued bY the f,rnal and it cannot be challenged by any agency or stakeholder. Actions against delinquents wili 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 specified by the Government of India' is not Provided or allowed at the Therefore, no remedy of aPPeal He further submitted that the rice subsequent insPection stages 2t limit of rice identificd as 3RL must be immediately replaced. Hou ever, out of 56 samples, 14 lramples were found exceeding the unifor n specification rrnd declared as BRL. The respondent ruthorities are directed that ,he stocks lhat are declared as BRL may be replaced as per the procr.rlure and they have not rejected the stoc}.s, which were declared as BFIL. If the fresh stocks were supplied in pl rce of BRL, no prejudicc rvol id be caused to the petitioners.

9.2 Fle furtlrer submitted that as per the SOp fbr the Kharif season 2023-24, any BRL musr be immediately replaced by tl e responsible rice miiler bei rg verified by the AGM (ec) ol the concerrred Divisional or Regional ()ffice. Additionally, the accumulation of BRL in respondenL Nc.2 Depots is strictly prohibited. If the rejr:cted rots are not remor.ed ri i:hin 24 hours, appropriate action will be taken against the rice millers.

9.3 In supporL of his submission, he relied upon ol_the judgment of the High Court,r[ punjab and Haryana ar Chandigarh in Isher Singh Hardeep Singh Rice Mills v. State of punjab and ot hersa. The principle of judic iai restraint in administrative matters sta ing that the procedurar decision lie with authorities and interference i; warranted only in Lhe cas,cs of misuse of power or procedural vi< lations. It 4 202i SCC ontine l,&t - 810 22 declines to direct an investigation, emphasizing the discretion of the authorities in policy implementation'

10. Learned counsel ior the petitioners, by way of reply, submitted that FRK manufacturers must maintain batch-wise records ol Certificates of Analysis and the vitamins and minerals premixed in production, uploading them to t'he 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 rqspondent authorities have conducted initial inspection without pointing out any discrepancies. Later, the respondents conducted surprise checks in their absence and the stocks were declared as BRL' without following the due proce dure and acted according to their own whims and fancics. He submitted that SOP mandates that tests to be conducted within two months, but this timeiine was not adhered to by the respondents. I O. I 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. It is stated in the counter-afhdavit of respondent No'2 that 13 stocks were manually a.rLalyzed' and I stock was tested by rationale behind using AI rnachines and they failed to explain the using man rral sampling in some cases. In essence the petitioners argue that the inspection process, surprise checks, and sampling procedures rvcre flawed, lacked transparency, and violtted the SOp. 10.2 In r:ply submissions again he relied uporL the following judgmen ts 1 State bank of India and others v. Rajesh Argarwal an d otherss 2 Akhil Bharatiya Soshit Karmachari Sangh v. .Union of India & Ors6

3. Jasbhai Motibhai Desai V Basher Ahmed And Orsz Roshan Kunrar, Haji Analysis:

11. Having considered the rival submissions rrade by respective parties and a:ter perusal of material available on recorcl, it reveals that in the year. 2t)22, the Government of India introducecl he scheme oI fortification ot' rice, r.r,here by fortified rice woulcl be sup olied through the TPDS for .he purpose of supplying the rice to the petple, who are below the povtrt]. line, students, pregnant women, etc., Accordingly, respondent Nc.r had issued operational Guidelines datel 13.12.2023 ' 1zoo3 y 6 scc I ltes ri r scc zos '1rozolr scc ozr u 24 on quality control for FRK and FR formulated by the DFPD in order to maintain qualiry 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 foilowing SOP procedure issued by respondent No'1' However' in the year 2022' respondent No. 1 rejected the deliveries made by the petitioners alleging that the FRK was not biended properly with CMR in the prescribed ratto' Pursuant to the same' the petitioners have submitted representation dated 18.O8'2023 to respondent No 2' wherein it is stated that the respondent authoritres accepted the supply of the stocks made by the petitioners after conducting initial inspection and after lapse of long period, they arc not entitied 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 A11 India Rice Millers Assoiiation' conducted a meedng on 18.O8-2023 ln the said meeting' in orcler to ensure transparency' it was agreed upon tha[ SOP dated I5'O3'2O23 notifred by respondent No.1 has been revised As per the revised notification' dated 26.12-2023, DFPD may conduct surprise checks to ensure the prescribed level of micronutrients in Fortified Rice at any stage- Theredfter, the petitioners have submitted another representation r 25 dated I I.O9.2O23 requesting respondcnt No.1 to rcsolve the issues pertatning tc replacement of FR 72 In March 2024 to June 2024, the petitioners nrade deliveries of cl-recking, FR ro respondent No.2 and after conducting thoro _rgh accepted the same n,itho ut 25.O4.2024, 26.O4.2024 e nd the officials However, objections. mechanized ralslng any

29.O4.2024, respondent No.1 had a te 1m purportedly deputecl to inspect respondent llo.2 Depots and callng Llpon the Exccutiv: Director, Food Corporation of India, Zonal Office, South, through communication dated r 7 .06.'.2024, to take appropriate action for the s :ocks that have been decla -,:cl as BRL. Thereafter, rcspondent No.3 issued proceedings dated 18.06.2024 informing rhe pcLiti< ners that the stocks delivrred by them for the year 2023_24 have b:en found BRL and directed the petitioners to replace the BRL stock rvi.h fresh stock. 13. In all he writ petitions, iL is stated that the nce millers have installed the pr165s1i5s6 machinery to ensure that effect ve blending of FRK with rlMR and they procured FRK fiom the licensed manufacturet s,, who have been authorized by responde nt No.2. The blending mactLine operates the blending as per the rat io prescribed. Thereafter, the rice millers deliver the FR to responden _ No.2. Upon receiving suclr deliveries, respondent No.2 u,ill conducl testing and once such delivery is acccpted, the role of rice millers comes to an end.

14. The grievance of the petitioners is that as per SOP dated ls.o3.2023,therespondentauthoritiesshallconductphysical analysis of the parametcrs by drawing samples from the stocks' which were delivered by the petitioners However' the respondents without conducting such test and after accepting the deliveries' conducted surprise inspection and rejected the deliveries of the petitioners On 11.06.2024, respondent No 1 addressed a letter to respondent No 2 Corporation, wherein it is stated that as per the procedure' the team from the Ministry was dcputed to inspect the food storage depots under respondent No.2 in the month of Apr\l' 2024 ' During the course of inspection, three depots were inspected and in total 56 numbers of rice samples \\,,ere collected. Thereafter, they conducted analysis test and basing on the detailed analysis report' it is found that out of total 56 samples of rice' 14 samples were found exceeding the uniform speci{icatton limit of rice and declared as BRL On 12.07 .2024, respondent No' 1 found in other Depots that out of 75 samples, 17 were found 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 lhe earliest' as per the procedure' 21

15. Tl-re record further reveals thaL as per t he mandate of GovernmerLt. of India, a team of DFPD conductecl insg ection of various FSBS. r.vhi : h are under the control of FCI in variou ; districts in the State of Tel,lngana, along with FCI and Starte Coverr ment officials in the month crf March to June, 2024. During the cour se of inspection, they have r:ollected the samples and conducted tesl i.s per the higher standards titled as "lndian Standards CtrRDAL AND CEREAL PRODUCTti-SAMPLING". The said samples lt'ere dra.r,n and sealed in the presence of Food Corporation of Inclia and State Government Officials. 'I lie samples drawn during inspcctions \ver( i analyzed in the Laboratory of DFPD under the Ministry of Consumcr ,\ifairs, Food and Public Dis,r'ibution as per BIS standards titlecl a; 'Fortified Rice Specificatic rLs'.

16. The rlaim of the peti[ioners is that respondcnt authorities have conducted surprise checks, especially rvithout givinp any notice and opportuniq to the petitioners and without lollorvinS due procedure prescribed under the SOP and also conducted test without issuing notice and opportunity to the petitioners and basinll on the alleged report furrr:shed by the Government Authority, lhe respondent authorities rejected the stocks supplied bl, the pe itioners on .the ground tha t the same were found as BRL and Lh( same is gross violation of principles of natural justice and contrcln' o the SOp. The 28 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 Ce11s' which are under the direct of the DFPD with its headquarters in New Delhi and Regional Oflices at Kolkata, Hyderabad' Bangalore' Bhopal' Bhubaneshwar, Lucknon', Punc, Patna' Chennai and Guwahati The Depots were selected by the deputed Inspecting Ofhcer invariably and in the godowns. randomly as per the availability of stock position During the course of inspection, the inspection samples and sent for analysis test in the laboratory of DFPD as per the BIS standards. In the said test' it was revealed that the stocks team draws the supplied by the pelitioners are BRL' the surprise

17. The record turther reveals that in inspection/check, as per the SOP' there is no requirement of issuance of prior notice to the petitioners proposing to conduct surprise check/ inspection and also there is no requirement to conduct analysis test in the p.""".rt" of the petitioners, especially when the petitioners 29 have not zr'tributed any malafides against the offici tls of respondent Nos. I ancl 2 Lhat they intentionally refLrsed to rccept [he stock supplied b1 Lhem. Hence, the relief sought by the p:titione rs seeking to declare the action of the respondents in rcjecting he delivery of FR macle b1, ttre petitioners for the crop year 2O23-2q as illegal, is not tenzrble unc.er law, especially on the ground that the -espondents have not rcjectecl the stock supplied by them and ther- rnly directed the petitioners to replace the stocks as per rhe ijOp for quality managemer t for FRK and FR, as the said rice is ncant for public Distributior: System.

18. It is p,ertinent to mention that the petirioners lrave not brought to thc notice of this Court any provision or pro:edurc that the presence ol' the parties is required at the timr of conducting inspection, rlrawing of the samples and also at rhc rir te of conducting analysis ter;,. [t reveals from the record that the pre;cnce of the rice millers rs rr rt allowed on the ground thar the resp )ndents have to maintain ccnfidentiaiity of the entire process zrnc.l to avoid undue influence )n the concerned Inspecting Offlccrs. Hence, the contentions raised by the learned counsel lor the pet tioners that the respondent; have conducted surprise inspections. dr:u. samples and i0 conducted analysis test without providing notice or an opportunlty and rejected the stocks supplied by them is not tenable under law' respondent No.3 authorities Insofar as the other contentions raised by the learned counsel petitioners have submitted 19 for the petitioners that though the representation ot 18.06.2024 before 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'1 are concerned' as per the guidelines framed under SOP dated 26'12'2003' there is no remedy of appeal is provided agalnst the decision takcn by respondent Nos' 1 and 2authoritiesonthegroundthattheyconductedinspection subsequent to the acceptance of the stock by way of surprise checks' As per the instructions issued by respondent No'2 dated 26 09 '2023 ' the remedy of appeal is provided at the time o[ acceptance of FR only' but not subsequent stage of inspections'

20. In the case on hand, the competent authority conducted surprise checks and after analyztrtg the samples' 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, respondent No.1 issued proceedings dated 1 Inet 2024 informing respondent No'2 to take necessary steps ,l for repracenrcnt of the stocks. pursuant to the .bor.e saicl proceedings as rvell as the proceedings issued by responclent No.2, the Telangana State Civil liupplies Corporation Limited and Telangz na Warehousing Corporatiorr, through impugned proceedings requeste I the petitioners, nce millerl; to arrange the replacement of BRL strcks *.ith fresh stocks. He rLce, the contention raised by the learned counsel for the petitioners that the respondent authorities rejectecl t,rc stocks is not tenaltle unc t:r law, since the respondents have not re jected the stock and the1, o rly requested the petitioners, rice mrllcrs to replace the stocks on t[Lr: ground that the stocks supplied by the peLitioners,rice millers u.ere lbund BRL r ounsel lor the a bsence of any

21. Thc oJter contentions raised by the learnecl petitioners t haL the inspecting authorities, in the permission. r onducted su rprise physical inspection rnd conducted manual testirg contrary to the additional guidelines da ed 15.O2_2024 are concern€ cl, the said guidelines were issued lbr et rhancement of qualitl. contrll measures for usage of Artificial Intellig:nce based an Automated Grain Analyzer (AIAGA) and the said additi< nal guidelines are came vvit r effect from 75.02.2024 Whereas, in tL e case on [he surprlse check was conducted by the competent autho.ity as per the guiclelines frarned under SOp dated 15.03.2023 and t lken samples and conduct<:rl test manually, wherein they foun<1 that rhe FR supplied bY the Petitroners' rice millers are BRL' As Per the SOP dated 15.O3'2023, the authorities concernecl are entitled to conduct rice mills, raiiheads' truck surprise checks at food storage depots' prior intimation is required ' heads and Fair Price Shops and also no As per clause 2 (b) of the SOP dated 16'07 2021 issued by respondent No.1, surprise inspection can be conducted at anY time by the Joint to the concerned authorities of team without giving any prior nottce the State Government'

22. In Mahavir Rice and General Mill (supra)' the High Court of Punjab and Haryana at Chandigarh held that when the petitioners are denied aliotment of paddy on the ground of defective fortified rice when there is no defect in the CMR and defect in the forfeited rice is on account of 1ow qualrty of FRK and FRK has not been manufactured by them, the Court is of the considered oPtnton that it would be of Articles 14 and 19(1)(g) of the unjust, unfair and violative Constitution of India' 23. In East India Commercial Co' f\^' Ltd' (supra)' the High Court of Delhi held that the failure to draw samples in the presence of the petitioners and the Iack of connection between the test report' Additionally, penaities under Section 167(8) should be imposed only in cases involving prohibited goods' not mis-description However' this JJ case is nct applicable on the ground that issue pertains to petroleum not lood c,trporalion.

21. In M/s. Sankambari Rice Industry, Bargarh (supra), the High Courr of ()rissa at Cuttack, held that this case is not applicable to present case as it is only an interim order and subs( quently Lhe main u.rit petitir,r'r 'nas also dismissed as withdrau,n on 09.15.2023.

25. [n litate Bank of India and others (supra), the Hon,ble Supreme - ourt referring to principles of natural ustice held that RBI's circ ular classifying an account as frauc ulent does not automatica h. amount to blacklisting. In tl-re pl esent case, the restrpply o t BRL stocks do not impact to any of the 6 etitioners, as Lhe stocks wer 3 not rejected but merely requested for rep. acement.

26. Irr A khil Bharatiya Soshit Karmachari Sarrgh (supra), rhe Hon'ble S : pre me Court held that Article 32 is not limited to recognized .lssociations or individuals with a direct cause of action. Hou'ever, tte present case involves the rejection of s ocks and all the rice milLels have already hled separate writ petitions. Hence, there is no necessir'.. for an Association or Telangana Societir s Rice Millers to be a par{:o the litigation. 34

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

28. It is brought to the notice of this Court that during the pendency of the writ petitions, pursuant to the decision taken 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 19723 of 2024 is no more in existence. Insofar as the other writ petitions are concerned, it is alreadY 29. stated suPra, that resPondent Nos. 1 and 2 authorities have not rejecled the FR supplied by the petitioners and only directed them to replace the stocks as per the norms fixed under SOP' as [he stocks supplied U! tne petitioners are found BRL' and this Court does not 35 find an}, eround, much less valid ground ro in terfere with the impugned crders passed by the respondent aulhorit es exercising the po\vers cor,lerred under Article 226 of th-e Constitutio-r of India.

30. AccorCingl_1,, all the writ petitions are dismisserl. No order as to Miscerlaneous petitions, pending if any, shall sta -rd closed. To, //TRUE COPY// StY.MOHD. ISMAIL ASSIFT/\NT REGISTRAR ' t\'. \- l\sicrroru oFFrcER \ ,.'/ 1. One CC to SRI PASHAM MOHITH, Advocate. IOPUCI 2. One CC to SRI K.VENUMADHAV, Advocate. IOPUCI' 3. One CC to SRI B.NARASTMHA SARMA, (Additiohat Soticitor General of 4. One CC to SItl DOMINIC FERNANDES, Standin! Counset f rr FCt.'[OPUC] 5. One CC to IiRl T.P.ACHARYA, SC for Tela-ngana Stare Civit'Supplies 6. One CC to SItl A.PHANI BHUSHAN, SC FOR TSWC. tOPU,)l 7. Two CD Copies. lndia| f igh_{42ult fo1 the State of Telangana at Hyderabad. ICPUCI Corporation. OPUCI BSK b 53 HIGH COURT DATED:1110312025 COMMON ORDER WP.Nos. 15889, 15926, 19107,19159, 19521, 19546, 19548, 19549, 19555, 19614,19621, 19630, 19723,19946, 20506 &27766oF 2024 o (, L) .t :r.i $l-r,-6 .P o .t 2 B APB 2[25 r^i\-; DISMISSING THE WRIT PETITIONS WITHOUT COSTS \ ( ?