THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE C.V.NAGARJUNA REDDY WRIT PETITION No.13519 of 2009 Date:23.06.2011 Between: Bhogi Srinivasa Rao ..... Petitioner AND M/s.Bharath Petroleum Corporation, Mumbai and others .....Respondents Counsel for the Petitioner: Sri P.V.A.Padmanabham Counsel for Respondent No.1: Sri O.Manohar Reddy Counsel for Respondent No.2: M.Ravindranath Reddy Counsel for Respondent No.3: A.Ravi Shankar The Court made the following: ORDER: At the interlocutory stage, the writ petition itself is taken up for hearing and disposal with the consent of the learned counsel for the parties. In this writ petition, the petitioner, who is one of the applicants for LPG distributorship of respondent No.1 Corporation in respect of Pathapatnam Village and Mandal, Srikakulam District, has questioned the selection of respondent No.3 as LPG distributor on divergent grounds. In the counter-affidavit filed by respondent No.1, it is inter alia stated that the petitioner has addressed letters dated 30.06.2009 and 02.07.2009 raising his grievances against the selection of respondent No.3 and that the same will be enquired into by the Grievance Redressal Committee as provided under Clause 19 of the Broacher. At the hearing, the learned counsel representing Sri O.Manohar Reddy, learned standing counsel appearing for respondent No.1, submitted that in view of pendency of this writ petition, the petitioner’s grievances were not considered and that the Committee is prepared to consider his grievances. Having regard to the above submission, the Writ Petition is disposed of, without going into the merits of the case, with the direction to respondent No.1 to ensure that the grievances of the petitioner mentioned in letters dated 30.06.2009 and 02.07.2009 are examined by appropriate Committee and a decision thereon is taken within a period of two months from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. The decision of respondent No.1 shall be communicated to the petitioner. If the petitioner feels aggrieved by the decision of respondent No.1, he shall be free to challenge the same on all legally permissible grounds including those which are raised in the present writ petition. As a sequel to disposal of the writ petition, interim order dated 15.07.2009 in W.P.M.P.No.17575 of 2009 is vacated and W.P.M.P.Nos.17575 of 2009 and 33180 of 2010 are disposed of as infructuous. ________________________ C.V.NAGARJUNA REDDY, J 23rd June, 2011 GHN