THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE R. SUBHASH REDDY Writ Petition No.24011 of 2007 ORDER: 1 In this Writ Petition the petitioner has questioned the notification issued by the third respondent inviting applications for appointment of Fair Price Shop dealer in Chapalamadugu village and also the consequential appointment appointing the fourth respondent as a dealer of the said village. 2 Previously, the petitioner was holding authorisation as Fair Price Shop dealer of Chapalamadugu village. His authorisation was cancelled by the primary authority by order dated 07.12.2005, which order was reversed by the appellate authority by order dated 22.07.2006. As against the said order of the appellate authority, the temporary dealer who was appointed in absence of the petitioner carried the matter by way of revision before the revisional authority. The said revision was allowed by order dated 12.02.2007 setting aside the order of the appellate authority dated 22.07.2006. During the course of arguments, it is brought to notice of the Court that the order of the revisional authority has been confirmed in view of the dismissal of the Writ Petition filed by the petitioner against the said order. 3 Consequent to the cancellation of the authorisation held by the petitioner, a fresh notification was issued reserving the vacancy for Scheduled Caste category, selections were made and the fourth respondent herein was appointed as dealer for the said Fair Price Shop. 4 In this Writ Petition, the only contention advanced by the learned counsel for the petitioner is that earlier in Chapalamadugu village there were two shops and one of them was held by the candidate belonging to Scheduled Caste and another shop was held by the petitioner who belongs to Backward Class community. It is submitted that earlier when the said shop was reserved for the candidate belongs to B.C. category, there is no reason for the authorities for reserving the very same Fair Price Shop to the Scheduled Caste category in the impugned notification. It is also submitted that without proper notification, selections were made only to accommodate the fourth respondent in the vacancy. 5 I have perused the notification issued by the respondents and also the order of appointment. Although it is contended by the learned counsel for the petitioner that there is no proper publication of notification, but at the bottom of the notification it is stated that the same is displayed in the office of the Gram Panchayat and it was also informed to the general public by beat of tom tom. In view of the publication in the Gram Panchayat office and further communication to the general public by beat of tom tom with regard to the notification, it cannot be said that there is no wide publicity for the notification. At the same time, while it is true that earlier the shop was held by the petitioner who belong to Backward Class community, but there is no such requirement to reserve the said shop to the same category in the impugned notification. For the purpose of reservations, as per the instructions issued by the Government, the entire division is a unit. If there any shortfall in the vacancies reserved for Scheduled Caste candidates, it is always open to the respondent authorities to reserve the Fair Price Shops to the candidates belong to Scheduled Caste category to make good such shortfall. During the course of arguments, it is submitted by the learned counsel for the fourth respondent that as there was a shortfall in the authorisations held by the candidates belong to Scheduled Caste category, the impugned notification is issued reserving the said shop for Scheduled Caste category candidate. In that view of the matter the argument advanced by the learned counsel for the petitioner that earlier as it was reserved for Backward Class candidate, it should have been notified by reserving the said shop again to Backward Class candidate only cannot be accepted. 6 For the aforesaid reasons, I do not find any illegality in the action of the respondents in notifying the Fair Price Shop at Chapalamadugu village by reserving the same to Scheduled Caste category candidate and consequently to invalidate the appointment of the fourth respondent as a dealer to the said shop. The Writ Petition is devoid of any merit and accordingly the same is dismissed. No costs. ------------------------ R.Subhash Reddy, J. 01.11.2011 Kvsn