HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE R. SUBHASH REDDY WRIT PETITION No.21188 of 2010 Date : 31.08.2010 Between : Katram Venkatravamma. …..Petitioner And The District Collector (Civil Supplies), Nalgonda District & others. …..Respondents HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE R. SUBHASH REDDY WRIT PETITION No.21188 of 2010 ORDER : In this writ petition, the petitioner has questioned the notification bearing No.G/2079/2010, dated 13th August 2010, issued by the 2nd respondent-Revenue Divisional Officer, for filling up the vacancy of fair price shop dealer in Kistapuram village of Kodad Mandal in Nalgonda District, by reserving the vacancy to the physically handicapped candidate. In this writ petition, it is the case of the petitioner that earlier, the vacancy was reserved for O.C. (Women), as such, there is no basis or justification for reserving it for the physically handicapped category in the impugned notification. For appointment of fair price shop dealers, the Government has issued orders in G.O.Ms.No.52, dated 18.12.2008. As per the said G.O., 3% vacancies are to be reserved for physically handicapped candidates. Based on the written instructions, it is submitted by the learned Government Pleader appearing for respondents, that in Suryapet Division, there are 457 fair price shops, out of which, 16 shops are to be reserved for physically handicapped persons, but at present, only 9 shops are being run by the physically handicapped persons, therefore, in the impugned notification, the vacancy is reserved for the physically handicapped persons. As much as 3% of vacancies are to be reserved for physically handicapped persons, and in view of deficiency, it is always open for the respondents to reserve the present vacancy for the physically handicapped candidates. Although it is contended by the learned counsel for petitioner that it is a designed attempt to fill up the vacancy with a person from outside the village, but even before the appointment is made, such a plea cannot be entertained, so as to invalidate the very notification itself, at this stage. Writ petition is accordingly dismissed. No order as to costs. ______________________ R. SUBHASH REDDY, J 31st August 2010 ajr