HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE R. SUBHASH REDDY WRIT PETITION Nos. 2168, 2169, 2171, 2173, 2186, 2805, 2806, 2867, 3517 & 4172 of 2008 Date : 24.10.2011 Between : Abdul Majeed & others. …..Petitioners And Government of Andhra Pradesh, rep. by its Secretary, Department of Consumer Affairs, Food and Civil Supplies (CS-I) Department & others. …..Respondents HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE R. SUBHASH REDDY WRIT PETITION Nos. 2168, 2169, 2171, 2173, 2186, 2805, 2806, 2867, 3517 & 4172 of 2008 COMMON ORDER : As the relief sought for in all these writ petitions is on similar lines, they are heard together and are being disposed of by this common order. For the purpose of disposal, I refer to the facts as arise in W.P.No.2168 of 2008. 2. In this writ petition, the petitioner seeks directions by way of Mandamus, declaring the action of respondents in not supplying kerosene on the licence/authorization issued to him, as illegal and arbitrary, with further directions to the respondents to consider his case for conversion as fair price shop dealer without reference to the age and educational qualifications, by declaring G.O.Ms.No.32, dated 30th August 2007, issued by the 1st respondent, in so far as it relates to the prescription of age and educational qualifications, as illegal and arbitrary. 3. The petitioner is a nominated retail kerosene dealer and also holder of licence under the A.P. Petroleum Products (Licencing and Regulation of Supplies) Order, 1980. It is stated that the licence was issued to him in the year 2001 by attaching about 350 ration cards for supply of kerosene and the same is renewed from time to time. In this writ petition, it is the grievance of the petitioner that the Government has taken a decision to supply all essential commodities through public distribution system under one roof, as such, a policy decision has been taken to convert all the nominated retail kerosene dealers into fair price shop dealers, and as per the said policy, the petitioner has applied for the same but he is not being considered for appointment as a fair price shop dealer. It is his grievance that though a policy decision has been taken to convert the nominated retail dealers as fair price shop dealers to make available all the essential commodities under one roof, surprisingly, the respondents have issued G.O.Ms.No.32, dated 30th August 2007, to amend the guidelines which were issued earlier for appointment of fair price shop dealers. It is stated that as per the guidelines issued in G.O.Ms.No.32, all the requisite qualifications viz., the educational qualifications and the age restrictions as notified in the earlier guidelines, shall be applicable to the hawkers/nominated retail dealers while converting their licences into fair price shop dealerships. It is his case that as he studied only upto 7th class and is more than 40 years of age, in view of the guidelines issued in G.O.Ms.No.32, dated 30th August 2007, he is deprived of conversion as fair price shop dealer. It is also the grievance of the petitioner that though he holds dealership as a nominated retail dealer, the respondents have stopped supplying kerosene without any valid reason or prior notice/opportunity. 4. The Assistant Supply Officer of Circle V, Hyderabad, has filed counter affidavit on behalf of respondents. In the counter, while denying the allegations of petitioner, it is stated that on the recommendations of the group of Ministers, a decision has been taken regarding conversion of existing nominated retailers as fair price shop dealers in a phased manner to make available all essential commodities to the cardholders under one roof. It is stated that as per the circular instructions issued in Instructions No.N5/2847/2005, dated 31st of May 2005, for conversion of nominated retail dealer into fair price shop dealer, the minimum educational qualification prescribed for the retailer is the 10th Class and the age limit is 18 to 40 years. It is also stated that as per the said instructions, the retail kerosene shop shall be in the concerned area and he must be otherwise qualified. It is stated that in the instructions, it is clearly stated that while filling up the fair price shop vacancy and creating the new fair price shop, preference shall be given to the nominated retailers who fulfill the requisite qualifications laid down in the guidelines. By referring to G.O.Ms.No.32, dated 30th August 2007, it is stated that by issuing the aforesaid G.O., the earlier guidelines were amended, and as per the guidelines issued in the said G.O., the nominated retail dealers are entitled for preference, but all the requisite qualifications, which were notified earlier, shall be applicable to those hawkers and nominated retail dealers while converting as fair price shop dealers. It is stated that the above said guidelines, which prescribe conditions with regard to the age and educational qualifications, are notified in the interest of the public distribution system and the petitioner cannot have any grievance about the same. In the counter, it is further stated that the public distribution system is prominently intended to serve the interests of the card holders and the present step is taken by the Government to ensure the availability of all commodities under one roof by giving preference to the nominated retail dealers, provided they are qualified with regard to the age and other qualifications as per the guidelines. 5. Heard Sri A.Rajashekar Reddy, and Sri Kowturu Vinaya Kumar, learned counsel appearing for petitioners, and the learned Government Pleader, appearing for respondents. 6. It is contended by the learned counsel for petitioners that in view of the policy decision as already taken by the group of Ministers for conversion of nominated retail dealers into fair price shop dealers, as the petitioners were appointed as nominated retail dealers more than two Decades back, and they are continuing as such, their cases are to be considered without reference to the educational and age restrictions. It is submitted by the learned counsel that in view of the aforesaid policy decision, no further guidelines should have been issued for conversion of nominated retail dealers as fair price shop dealers. In any event, in view of the existing dealerships of the petitioners as nominated retail dealers, there is no reason or justification for dis-continuing the supply of kerosene on their licences. 7. On the other hand, it is submitted by the learned Government Pleader appearing for respondents that hitherto, the scheduled commodities, namely, rice, sugar, wheat etc., were being distributed through fair price shops and only with regard to kerosene, the petitioners, who are nominated retail dealers, were supplying the kerosene, but in view of the difficulties faced by the cardholders and to make available all the essential commodities under one roof, it was decided to make available all the commodities including the kerosene at one place. It is stated that there was a policy decision to convert the nominated retailers as fair price shop dealers subject to fulfilling the eligibility criteria with regard to the age and educational qualifications. It is submitted that as per the notified eligibility criteria which is presently in force, one must pass 10th Class and should be within the age group of 18 and 40 years for appointment as a fair price shop dealer. It is submitted that the petitioners/nominated dealers have no right for appointment as such, and hence, they cannot seek for any directions by way of Mandamus, for their appointment as fair price shop dealers. It is stated that as per the guidelines, preference will be given to the petitioners provided they qualify in all other respects. 8. Having heard the learned counsel for the parties, I have also perused the relevant control orders issued under the provisions of the Essential Commodities Act, 1955 and the circular instructions issued by the Government and the Commissioner of Civil Supplies from time to time. The appointment of fair price shop dealers and distribution of essential commodities was initially governed by the Andhra Pradesh Scheduled Commodities (Regulation of Distribution by Card System) Order, 1973, which was repealed after the promulgation of the The Andhra Pradesh State Public Distribution System (Control) Order, 2001. The said order was also repealed and presently, The Andhra Pradesh State Public Distribution System (Control) Order, 2008 is in force, which govern the appointment of fair price shop dealers for distribution of essential commodities. 9. It is true that the Commissioner of Civil Supplies, in Circular instructions, dated 19.03.2005, issued in Circular No.PDS.II(3)/2847/ 2005, has communicated the decision taken by the group of Ministers in the meeting held on 15th January 2005 for conversion of the existing nominated retail dealers as fair price shop dealers in a phased manner, to make available all essential commodities to the card holders under one roof, but there is no reference to the eligibility criteria for such conversion. Subsequently, when clarifications were sought, directions were issued saying that the eligibility criteria which was notified for appointment as fair price shop dealers, will also apply to the petitioners, and they shall be given preference in the selections while filling up the vacancies, if they qualify for such appointment. It is not in dispute that as per the guidelines notified by the respondents for appointment of fair price shop dealers, one must be qualified educationally by passing 10th Class and also within the age group of 18 and 40 years. In G.O.Ms.No.53, dated 06.10.2003, guidelines were issued for appointment of fair price shop dealers, as per which, a pass in 10th Class will be the minimum general educational qualification and the minimum and maximum age for appointment as a dealer is notified as 18 and 40 years respectively. In view of the policy decision taken to consider the conversion of nominated retail dealers as fair price shop dealers, earlier guidelines were amended by issuing G.O.Ms.No.32, dated 30th August 2007. The amendment to guideline No.9 reads as under : “Preference shall be given to the hawkers/N.Rs having licence under the A.P.Public Distribution System (Licencing and Regulation of Supply) Rules, 1980 for selection and appointment as fair price shop dealerl, while filling up the existing or new fair price shop vacancy. All requisite qualifications and guidelines issued by Government from time to time shall be applicable to those hawkers/N.Rs while converting into fair price shop dealer subject to fulfilling the conditions of appointment of fair price shop dealers by the N.R/Hawkers who are otherwise eligible for appointment.” 10. During the course of hearing, it is submitted by the learned Government Pleader appearing for respondents that the nominated retail dealers, who are holding licences, are being supplied with the kerosene and there is no discontinuation as such, as pleaded by the petitioners. It is stated that, if for any reason, the dealership is not being continued, in such an event, supply is being made by appointing fair price shop dealer even for supply of kerosene. 11. From the circular instructions and the guidelines issued by the Government in G.O.Ms.No.32, dated 30th August 2007, it is clear that though a policy decision has been taken for conversion of nominated retail dealers into fair price shop dealers so as to make available all the essential commodities which are being supplied under public distribution system under one roof, at no point of time, any orders are passed to exempt such candidates from possessing the requisite qualifications with regard to age and educational qualifications. It appears there is an object behind imposing such minimum qualifications because a person, who is appointed as a fair price shop dealer, shall be educationally qualified so as to make necessary entries in the relevant registers, which are required to be maintained as per the Control order. Even with regard to the age restriction, it cannot be said that fixing of age between 18 and 40 years also cannot be said to be illegal. It appears, such restriction is made to avoid entrusting of dealership to the young persons below the age of 18 years, so as to make the system for distribution of essential commodities effective. In that view of the matter, merely because the petitioners are not fulfilling those conditions, it cannot be said that such guidelines are either illegal or arbitrary, so as to set aside the same in these writ petitions. It is also to be noticed that in the judgment relied on by the learned Government Pleader appearing for respondents in the case of District Collector and another V. B.Suresh[1], the Hon’ble Supreme Court has held that the dealers have no right to be appointed as such, and the same is not in contravention of rights guaranteed under Article 19(1)(g) of the Constitution of India. 12. Even in this case, it is to be noticed that earlier also, petitioners were acting as dealers for supply of kerosene, and in that view of the matter, they may have only preferential right as per the guidelines, but they cannot have any right de horse the eligibility criteria notified with regard to the educational qualification and age restriction, to seek appointment as a dealer. In the absence of any such right for appointment, as held by the Hon’ble Apex Court in the judgment referred above, petitioners, who are not fitting into the eligibility criteria notified as per the guidelines, cannot seek any directions for appointment as such. 13. So far as the allegation of the petitioners that they are not being supplied kerosene on their existing licences is concerned, it is fairly submitted by the learned Government Pleader that so long their licences are valid, they are entitled for supplies and that supplies are being made to them. 14. For the aforesaid reasons, I do not find any merit in these writ petitions for grant of directions to the respondents to appoint the petitioners as fair price shop dealers by invalidating the guidelines issued in G.O.Ms.No.32, dated 30th August 2007, but at the same time, I direct the respondents to supply kerosene on the nominated retail dealership/hawker licences held by the petitioners, so long they hold valid licences, as per their entitlement. 15. The writ petitions are disposed of with the directions referred above. No order as to costs. ______________________ R. SUBHASH REDDY, J 24th October 2011 ajr [1] 2000 (1) ALD 9 (SC)