The Hon’ble Sri Justice C.V. Nagarjuna Reddy Writ Petition No.27251 of 2014 Dated: 22.12.2014 Between:
Sri Narayanamma Mahila Mandal rep. by its Group Leader N.Narayanamma ..
Petitioner and The Govt. of Andhra Pradesh, Rep. by its Principal Secretary, Civil Supplies Department, Secretariat, Hyderabad, and 3 others.
..
Respondents Counsel for the petitioner: Mr.Suresh Kumar Reddy Kalava Counsel for the respondents: AGP for Civil Supplies (AP) The Court made the following:
Order:
This Writ Petition is filed for a Mandamus to set aside the order in Roc.No.A3/4351/2014, dated 05- 09-2014, of respondent No.2, whereby he has cancelled the proceeding in D.Dis.No.A3/5160/2014, dated 21-08-2014, issued in favour of the petitioner, and entrusted fair price shop No.35 of Gyarampalli Village, to respondent No.4.
I have heard Mr.Suresh Kumar Reddy Kalava, learned Counsel for the petitioner, and the learned Assistant Government Pleader for Civil Supplies (AP), representing the respondents, and perused the record.
Consequent on arising of vacancy on account of resignation of the permanent dealer of fair price shop No.35, respondent No.2 has issued the aforesaid proceeding, dated 21-08-2014, entrusting the said shop to the petitioner, who is the dealer of fair price shop No.39 of Thimmapuram Village. However, based on report, dated 28-08-2014, of the Tahsildar, K.V.Palle Mandal, respondent No.2 has cancelled the said proceeding and passed the impugned order, dated 05-09-2014, whereunder he has entrusted the said fair price shop to respondent No.4, who is the permanent dealer of fair price shop No.36 of Theethavakuntapalli Village.
A perusal of the impugned order shows that the reason for cancelling the proceeding, dated 28-08- 2014, issued in favour of the petitioner is the alleged rivalry between herself and the cardholders attached to fair price shop No.35 of Gyarampalle Village.
In my opinion, the petitioner, who is the dealer of one fair price shop, does not have any indefeasible right for being continued as the in-charge of another fair price shop. Therefore, no Mandamus can be issued to invalidate the order impugned in this Writ Petition. However, it is not desirable to continue the in-charge arrangements in respect of the fair price shop in question for a long period. Therefore, respondent No.2 is directed to initiate immediate steps for filling up the said vacancy on permanent basis and complete the process within two months from the date of receipt of this order.
Subject to the above direction, the Writ Petition is dismissed.
As a sequel to dismissal of the Writ Petition, WPMP.No.34119 of 2014, filed by the petitioner, for interim relief, is disposed of as infructuous.
(C.V. Nagarjuna Reddy, J) Dt: 22nd December, 2014 lur