IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction) WEDNESDAY, THE TWENTY FOURTH DAY OF SEPTEMBER TWO THOUSAND AND EIGHT PRESENT THE HON'BLE MS JUSTICE G.ROHINI WRIT PETITION NO : 20808 of 2008 Between: Grama Aikya Sangam, rep.by its President, Khammari Balamani W/o.Srinivas Pedda Cheekondu(V) Dubbaka(M) Medak District ..... PETITIONER AND 1 The District Collector(CS) Medak District at Sanga Reddy 2 The Revenue Divisional Officer Siddipet,Medak District 3 The Tahasildar Dubbaka(M) Medak District 4 Smt.Kanthamma W/o Balaramulu Benami Dealer Pedda Cheekodu(V) Dubbaka(M) Medak District .....RESPONDENT(S) Petition under Article 226 of the constitution of India praying that in the circumstances stated in the Aﬃdavit ﬁled herein the High Court will be pleased to to issue a writ order or direction more particulalry one in the nature of writ of Mandamus declaring the action of the respondents in not supplying the essential commodities to the petitioner inspite of paying the requisite amount towards trade deposit and also the requisite amount for the supply of the essential commodities as illegal,arbitrary unconstitutional and consequently direct the respondent authorities to forthwith take action against the 4th respondent and permit the petitioner sangam to run theFair Price Shop of Pedda Chekodu(V) Dubbaka(M) Medak District and to grant such other relief or reliefs Counsel for the Petitioner:MR.PALLENAGESWAR RAO Counsel for the Respondent No.: GP FOR CIVIL SUPPLIES The Court made the following : THE HON'BLE MS JUSTICE G.ROHINI WRIT PETITION NO. 20808 of 2008 ORDER: As could be seen from the material on record, the second respondent issued a show cause notice dated 06.08.2008 calling upon the petitioner to submit their explanation with regard to the allegation that the petitioner failed to obtain the authorization in spite of its appointment as fair price shop dealer of Pedda Cheekodu village, dated 22.09.2007. The petitioner states that an explanation was already submitted on 17.09.2008. Immediately thereafter the present Writ Petition is ﬁled seeking a declaration that the action of the respondents in not supplying the essential commodities to the petitioner is arbitrary and illegal. Since the allegation is that the petitioner failed to obtain the authorization and admittedly the petitioner has never functioned as dealer from 22.09.2007 onwards, the direction to release the stocks cannot be granted. Accordingly, the Writ Petition is disposed of leaving it open to the second respondent to proceed with the enquiry and pass appropriate orders in accordance with law. The petitioner is also at liberty to challenge adverse order, if any, passed by the second respondent on such enquiry. No order as to costs. ------------------ G.ROHINI, J. 24.09.2008 kvsn ..... REGISTRAR // TRUE COPY // SECTION OFFICER To 1.2CCs to 2.2CD copies Form-NIC-OGS/WP{BMR}