IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction) WEDNESDAY, THE FIFTEENTH DAY OF OCTOBER TWO THOUSAND AND EIGHT PRESENT THE HON'BLE MS JUSTICE G.ROHINI WRIT PETITION NO : 21357 of 2006 Between: Bellamkonda Satyanarayana Reddy, S/o. Raji Reddy, R/o. H.No. 18-3-115/1, Gandhi Nagar, Godavarikhani, Karimnagar District. ..... PETITIONER AND 1 The Joint Collector (CS) Karimnagar, Karimnagar District. 2 The Revenue Divisional Officer, Peddapalli Division, Karimnagar District. 3 The Mandal Revenue Officer, Ramagundam Mandal, Karimnagar 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 in the nature of Writ of Mandamus directing the respondents 2 and 3 herein to supply the essential commodities to the petitioners fair price shop bearing No. 4513 for the ward Nos. 19-7 and 18-5 situated at H.No. 19-6-442, Laxminagar, Godavarikhani, Karimnagar District as long as his authorization in neither suspended nor cancelled by duty declaring the action of the 3rd respondent in not supplying the essential commodities to the petitioner's fair price shop No. 4513 for the ward Nos. 19-7 and 18-5 situated at H.No. 19-6-442, Laxminagar, Godavarikhani, Karimnagar District as illegal, arbitrary, and contrary to the well settled principles of law laid down while adjudicating the issues involved under A.P. State Public Distribution System (Control) Order, 2001 Counsel for the Petitioner:MR.VENKATESHWAR VARANASI Counsel for the Respondent No.: GP FOR CIVIL SUPPLIES The Court made the following : THE HON’BLE MS JUSTICE G.ROHINI W.P.No.21357 of 2006 ORAL ORDER The petitioner was appointed as authorized dealer of fair price shop bearing No.4513 of Laxminagar, Godavarikhani Mandal, Karimnagar District in the year 1991. Initially two wards viz., 19-7 and 18-5 were attached to the petitioner’s shop. However, on account of the release of new ration cards in Ramagundam area, number of cards attached to each fair price shop were increased and in the circumstances as per Government circular dated.19-03-2005 issued for rationalization of the cards, Ward NO.19-7 was deleted from the petitioner’s shop and part of the same was attached to the 4th respondent herein who is the dealer of fair price shop No.4542. It appears that at the relevant point of time since the 4th respondent’s authorization was under suspension the petitioner continued to distribute the commodities in respect of ward No.19-7 also. Subsequently after the restoration of the 4th respondent’s authorization when steps were taken for release of the essential commodities to the 4th respondent in respect of Ward Nod.19-7, the present writ petition has been ﬁled alleging that the action of the respondents in not releasing the commodities to the petitioner’s shop is arbitrary and illegal. This court while directing rule nisi by order dated.13-10- 2006 directed that the essential commodities shall be released to the petitioner’s shop provided the authorization was neither suspended nor cancelled. On behalf of the respondents 1 to 3 the Tahasildar, Ramagundam ﬁled a detailed counter-aﬃdavit explaining the rationalization process pursuant to the Government’s circular dated.19-03-2005. The 4th respondent also ﬁled a separate counter-affidavit on the same lines. Heard the learned counsel for both parties. From the circumstances explained in the counter- aﬃdavit, it is clear that some of the cards initially attached to the petitioner’s shop were deleted on account of the rationalization of cards in terms of Government policy. The said action, which is in the interest of the cardholders cannot be held to be arbitrary and illegal. Even assuming that by virtue of deletion of cards the petitioner’s shop became economically unviable, it is for the petitioner to work out the remedy of appeal before the Director of Civil Supplies. Hence leaving it open to the petitioner to work out the alternative remedy of appeal for redressal of his grievance if any, the writ petition is dismissed. No order as to costs. _____________ G. ROHINI, J. Dt.15.10.2008 Note: Issue CC in Three(3) days. (B/O) *TSNR