HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE NOUSHAD ALI Writ Petition No.23011 of 2011 Date: 20-10-2011 Between Smt. K.Usha Rani … Petitioner and The Revenue Divisional Officer, Gudur, Nellore district and another … Respondents HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE NOUSHAD ALI Writ Petition No.23011 of 2011 Order: Heard Sri Kowturu Vinaya Kumar, learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned Government Pleader for Civil Supplies appearing for the respondents 1 and 2, and with their consent, this writ petition is being disposed of at the stage of admission. 2. The petitioner is a temporary Fair Price Shop Dealer of Shop No.5 of Naidupet village and Mandal, Nellore district. She has filed this writ petition for a mandamus to declare inaction of the 1st respondent i.e., the Revenue Divisional Officer, Gudur, in considering her claim for appointment as a regular dealer in place of her deceased grandfather. 3. The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner’s grandfather was appointed as a regular dealer and he died on 23-01-2009. The petitioner, being his legal heir, is entitled to be considered for appointment on preferential basis and in that view of the matter, she be appointed as a regular dealer. 4. I am unable to accept the said contention. The grant of authorization is always based on the claims of an individual applicant and appointments will have to be made by calling for applications through notifications. An authorization is neither heritable nor transferable, hence there is no legal right nor vested right in favour of the petitioner to be appointed as a regular dealer. Clause 12 of the A.P. State Public Distribution System (Control) Order, 2008, specifically provides that in the event of death of a fair price shop dealer, the authorization issued to him shall stand cancelled and the legal heirs of the deceased are not entitled to transfer of authorization. Hence, the petitioner is not entitled to be appointed as a regular dealer as the legal heir of the deceased dealer. 5. The learned counsel for the petitioner, however, submits that the 1st respondent issued a notification dated 16-9-2009 inviting applications from the intending applicants for granting the authorization. The petitioner has applied for the same and since then, the 1st respondent has not taken any further steps in the matter. 6. The learned Government Pleader for Civil Supplies has placed a copy of instructions received from the Sub Collector, Gudur, admitting that the vacancy was notified and in response to the same, 16 applications have been received within the stipulated time and the petitioner is one of the applicants. It is stated that the interview could not be conducted due to multifarious urgent duties. 7. I am of the view that there is no justification on the part of the 1st respondent for keeping the matter pending ever since 2009. When once a notification has been issued, the 1st respondent ought to have taken further steps in the matter by passing appropriate orders within a reasonable time. 8. For the aforesaid reasons, this writ petition is disposed of, directing the 1st respondent to consider the applications received in pursuance of the notification dated 16-9-2009 and pass appropriate orders as expeditiously as possible, preferably within a period of 6 (six) weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. No costs. ___________________ NOUSHAD ALI, J. 20th October, 2011. Ak HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE NOUSHAD ALI Writ Petition No.23011 of 2011 20th October, 2011. (Ak)