HON’BLE MR.JUSTICE R. SUBHASH REDDY Writ Petition No.25306 of 2008 Date: August 11, 2011 Between: Smt.M.Vanaja, W/o.Srinivasulu, Aged about 28 years, Occ:F.P.Shop Dealer, R/o.U.Bollavaram village, Mahanandi Mandal, Kurnool District … Petitioner And The District Collector, Kurnool, and another … Respondents Order: This writ petition is filed questioning the action of the 1st respondent-District Collector, Kurnool, directing the 2nd respondent-Revenue Divisional Officer, Nandyal, Kurnool District, by order dated 19.02.2008, in Rc.DSO/CS3/53/2005, to notify the vacancy of fair price shop dealership of U.Bollavaram village of Mahanandi Mandal, for permanent appointment and to declare the petitioner as permanent dealer for the said fair price shop. In the affidavit filed in support of the writ petition, it is stated that one Sri B.Bala Seshanna was appointed as dealer for the fair price shop of U.Bollavaram village for distribution of essential commodities under the provisions of the Andhra Pradesh State Public Distribution System (Control) Order, 2008, framed under the Essential Commodities Act, 1955. On certain allegations, his dealership was cancelled by the Revenue Divisional Officer vide order dated 07.02.2002. On his filing an appeal against the said order before the Joint Collector, the appeal was disposed of restoring his dealership imposing a fine. Aggrieved by the order of the Joint Collector restoring the dealership, petitioner appears to have filed revision before the District Collector, who, by order dated 22.01.2005 stayed the order of the Joint Collector. W.P.No.1463 of 2005 was filed by the said Sri Bala Seshanna aggrieved by the order of the District Collector, which was disposed of by this Court with a direction to the District Collector to dispose of the revision pending on his file. Pursuant thereto, the 1st respondent passed the impugned order directing the 2nd respondent- Revenue Divisional Officer, Nandyal, Kurnool District to notify the vacancy of fair price shop dealership of U.Bollavaram village of Mahanandi Mandal, for permanent appointment. It is that order which is under challenge in this writ petition. While it is true that the petitioner was appointed as temporary dealer as an ad hoc arrangement for distribution of essential commodities in place of the permanent dealer whose dealership is cancelled on certain allegations, at the same time, no fault can be found with the impugned order, whereby the 1st respondent directed the 2nd respondent to notify the vacancy of fair price shop dealership for permanent appointment. Petitioner, who is a temporary dealer, cannot step into the shoes of a permanent dealer and contend that he has become a permanent dealer. While filling up vacancy of permanent dealer for a fair price shop, due process, as contemplated under the Control Order ought to be followed. Hence, petitioner, who is not appointed under the due process, cannot be declared a permanent dealer and no relief sought by her can be granted. Accordingly, writ petition is disposed of with the following direction: If the vacancy of fair price shop dealership of U.Bollavaram village of Mahanandi Mandal, for permanent appointment is unfilled as on today, respondents shall consider the claim of the petitioner along with all other applicants keeping in mind the fact that she worked as temporary dealer for the shop in question. No order as to costs. ___________________ (R.SUBHASH REDDY, J) August 11, 2011 MRR