HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE R. SUBHASH REDDY WRIT PETITION No.19152 of 2008 Date : 08.09.2010 Between : Pallamreddy Rajaswkhar Reddy. …..Petitioner And The District Collector, Nelore & others. …..Respondents HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE R. SUBHASH REDDY WRIT PETITION No.19152 of 2008 ORDER : This writ petition is filed, questioning the order of the District Collector, Nellore, dated 20.07.2008, passed in proceedings Rc.E.365/2007, confirming the order of Joint Collector, Nellore, dated 31.05.2007, passed in Rc.E.585/2006. In Jatlakonduru village of Manubolu Mandal in Nellore District, one K.V.Ramanaiah was the fair price shop dealer for distribution of essential commodities. In view of cancellation of the authorization of said K.V.Ramanaiah, the 3rd respondent/Sub-Collector-cum- Revenue Divisional Officer, Gudur, has issued notification, inviting applications from eligible persons to fill up the vacancy of fair price shop dealer on permanent basis. The petitioner, the 4th respondent and some others have applied in response to the said notification. Having regard to the qualifications and capacity to invest capital, and having tested the general knowledge and the simple mathematics, the 3rd respondent has awarded marks. The petitioner was awarded 7 ½ marks out of a total of 10 marks, whereas, respondent No.4 was awarded 6 ½ marks. In view of the highest marks secured among the candidates who were interviewed by the 3rd respondent, the petitioner was appointed as a fair price shop dealer for distribution of essential commodities. As against the appointment of the petitioner, the 4th respondent carried the matter by way of appeal before the Joint Collector under Clause 20 (1) of the A.P. Public Distribution System (Control) Order, 2001, a Control Order framed under the Essential Commodities Act, 1955. Mainly, the appointment of the petitioner was questioned on the ground that he was the President of Bharatiya Janata Party of Manubolu Mandal, as such, he should not have been appointed. In the appeal filed by the 4th respondent before the 2nd respondent, it was the case of the petitioner that he is not the President of the Bharatiya Janata Party Mandal Unit, and that one Sri Ch.Guravaiah was the President of Bharatiya Janata Party, Manubolu Mandal Unit. The 2nd respondent-appellate authority, while considering the guidelines issued in G.O.Ms.No.53, Consumer Affairs, Food and Civil Supplies (CS-1) Department, dated 06.10.2003, despite recording a finding that the persons holding party positions are not ineligible as per the guidelines, held that it is not desirable to consider such persons for appointment as fair price shop dealers, and thus, the appointment of the petitioner herein was set aside. As against the order of the Joint Collector, dated 31.05.2007, passed in Rc.E.585/2006, the matter was carried further in revision under Clause 20(1) of the Control Order, 2001, before the District Collector, Nellore, who has called for a report from the Tahsildar, Manubolu. The Tahsildar has sent his report in Rc.B.1/2006, dated 23.07.2007, in which, it is stated that the petitioner herein is neither a member nor having any role in the Bharatiya Janata Party of Nellore District. Inspite of the same, noting the contents of the report of the Tahsildar, dated 23.07.2007, the revisional authority also cancelled the appointment of the petitioner herein. Hence, this writ petition. In this writ petition, it is submitted by the learned counsel for petitioner that there was no basis for the 2nd respondent, for allowing the application filed by the 4th respondent. It is submitted that the petitioner was not holding any position in the Manubolu Mandal Unit of Bharatiya Janata Party, but inspite of the same, on the aforesaid allegation, the application was filed by the 4th respondent. It is stated that inspite of the fact that one Sri Ch.Guravaiah was the President of the Mandal Unit of Bharatiya Janata Party, the appellate authority, without recording any finding on the plea of the petitioner, allowed the appeal. It is further submitted that in any event, in the absence of any prohibition as per the guidelines notified by the Government in G.O.Ms.No.53, dated 06.10.2003, there is no bar for appointment of the petitioner. It is further stated that inspite of various grounds raised before the revisional authority, without recording any reasons, simply dismissed the revision, by confirming the order of the appellate authority. On the other hand, it is submitted by the learned Government Pleader appearing for respondents, that as it is alleged that the petitioner was the President of Bharatiya Janata Party Manubolu Mandal Unit, it is not desirable to appoint such person as a dealer for distribution of essential commodities. I have perused the order of the Joint Collector, dated 31.05.2007, passed in Rc.E.585/2006, and the further orders passed by the District Collector, dated 20.07.2008, in proceedings Rc.E.365/2007, passed on the review petition filed by the petitioner. From a perusal of the order passed by the Joint collector, it is clear that though there is allegation by respondent No.4 that the petitioner was the President of Bharatiya Janata Party, Manubolu Mandal Unit, but the same was denied by the petitioner herein and he has also stated that one Sri Ch.Guravaiah was the President of the Mandal Unit of Bharatiya Janata Party, and that he is not concerned with the political affairs of Bharatiya Janata Party. Inspite of the same, and further, in the absence of any material to show that the petitioner was holding any post in the party, the appellate authority has set aside his appointment. Even the appellate authority, while referring to the guidelines notified by the Government in G.O.Ms.No.53, dated 06.10.2003, inspite of holding that there was no disqualification for appointment of persons holding posts in party-organisations, still, on the ground that it is not desirable to appoint such person, has set aside the petitioner’s appointment. When the guidelines did not prohibit such appointments, there is no reason for the appellate authority to allow the appeal, by recording a finding that it is not desirable. When the appointments are regulated by the Control Order framed under the Essential Commodities Act, and further guidelines are issued for making such appointments, the appellate authority cannot travel beyond the scope of the guidelines issued by the Government in G.O.Ms.No.53, dated 06.10.2003, to set aside the appointment of petitioner. Further, from the report of Tahsildar, dated 23.07.2007, it is clear that the petitioner was not a member of Bharatiya Janata Party and he was also not having any position in the said party. Inspite of such report by the Tahsildar, issued in Rc.B.1/2006, the revisional authority also, without recording even a single reason, simply confirmed the order of the Joint Collector. In the absence of any material produced by the 4th respondent to show that the petitioner was holding any post in the Bharatiya Janata Party, Manubolu Mandal unit, and further, in the absence of any prohibition for making such appointments, the impugned orders are liable to be set aside. For the aforesaid reasons, the order of the Joint Collector, dated 31.05.2007, passed in Rc.E.585/2006, and the further orders passed by the District Collector, dated 20.07.2008, in proceedings Rc.E.365/2007, are hereby quashed and the writ petition is allowed as prayed for. No order as to costs. ______________________ R. SUBHASH REDDY, J 8th September 2010 ajr