IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction) FRIDAY, THE SEVENTH DAY OF NOVEMBER TWO THOUSAND AND EIGHT PRESENT THE HON'BLE MS JUSTICE G.ROHINI WRIT PETITION NO : 22696 of 2008 Between: B. Venkatamma W/o. B. Venkat Reddy R/o. H.No.1-61, Polkampalli Village, Pargi (M), R.R. Dist. ..... PETITIONER AND 1 The Dist. Collector & Dist. Magistrate R.R. Dist. 2 The Joint Collector & Addl. Dist. Magistrate R.R. Dist. 3 The Spl. Grade Dy. Collector & R.D.O. Chevella Division R.R. Dist. .....RESPONDENTS 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 or Order/s more particularly one in the nature of Writ of Mandamus declaring the inaction of the 1st respondent in not entertaining the stay application ﬁled by the petitioner along with unregistered revision ﬁled on dt.15-3-2008 challenging the order dated 18-1-2008 passed by the 2nd respondent in Appeal No.A7/803/2007 and order dated 3-9-2007 in Procgs.No.E/3171/2007 passed by the 3rd respondent as being illegal, arbitrary and uncontitutional and consequently set aside the same and be pleased. Counsel for the Petitioner:MR.B.VIJAYSEN REDDY Counsel for the Respondent No.: GP FOR CIVIL SUPPLIES The Court made the following : THE HON’BLE MS JUSTICE G.ROHINI W.P.NO.22696 OF 2008 ORDER The petitioner herein is the authorized dealer of fair price shop of Polkampalli village, Pargi Mandal, Ranga Reddy District. Her authorization was cancelled by the 3rd respondent herein by an order dated.03-09-2007. Aggrieved by the same, the petitioner preferred an appeal before the 2nd respondent-Joint Collector. The said appeal was dismissed on 18-01-2008. Thereafter the petitioner preferred a revision petition before the 1st respondent-District Collector along with an application for stay. Alleging that the 1st respondent failed to entertain the petitioner’s application for stay ﬁled along with the revision petition, the present writ petition is filed. When the matter is taken up for consideration, the learned Government Pleader under instructions stated that the petitioner’s revision petition was taken on record and notices were also issued to all the concerned and that subsequently the arguments were heard on 21-06-2008 and the orders were reserved. Having regard to the fact that the petitioner’s revision petition has already been taken on ﬁle by the 1st respondent, no further enquiry is necessary. Accordingly the writ petition is disposed of with a direction to the 1st respondent to dispose of the petitioner’s revision petition within a period of four(4) weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. Till such time no appointment of dealer on regular basis shall be made in respect of the shop in question. No costs. _____________ G.ROHINI,J 7th November,2008 *TSNR