IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction) FRIDAY, THE SECOND DAY OF MAY TWO THOUSAND AND EIGHT PRESENT THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE C.V.NAGARJUNA REDDY WRIT PETITION NO.10446 of 2008 Between: Smt. Boddepalli Bhagya Lakshmi W/o. Sri Boddepalli Ravi Kumar Housewife R/o. 2-117/1, Narasapuram, H/o. Polaki Village & Mandal, Srikakulam District. ..... PETITIONER AND 1 The Government of Andhra Pradesh, Rep. by its Joint Collector, Srikakulam, Srikakulam District. 2 The Revenue Divisional Officer, Srikakulam , Srikakulam District. 3 Kum. Korada Vimala D/o. Sri Rama Rao Narasapuram H/o. Polaki Village & Mandal, Srikakulam District. .....RESPONDENTS Counsel for the Petitioner: MR.UMASANKAR LOKANADHAM Counsel for Respondent Nos.1 and 2: GP FOR CIVIL SUPPLIES Counsel for Respondent No.3: -------- The Court made the following : ORDER: This Writ Petition is filed for a writ of mandamus to set aside proceedings dated 02-09-2008, passed by respondent No.2, whereby respondent No.3 was appointed as fair price shop dealer of Polaki Village and Mandal, Srikakulam District. Heard Sri Umashanker Lokanandam, learned Counsel for the petitioner, and perused the record. The grievance of the petitioner is that respondent No.2 appointed respondent No.3 by disqualifying her merely on the ground that she holds ration card in a fair price shop of a different village. At the hearing, the learned Counsel for the petitioner submitted that this ground of disqualification is wholly illegal, because there is no prohibition on a candidate belonging to the neighbouring Village applying for and seeking appointment as fair price shop dealer. In view of the fact that the petitioner has an effective remedy of appeal under Clause 20(1) of the Andhra Pradesh State Public Distribution System Control Order, 2001 (for short ‘the Order’), I am not inclined to entertain and adjudicate this Writ Petition on merits. The petitioner filed this Writ Petition on the premise that no such appeal lies. On a careful reading of Clause 20(1) of the Order, it is evident that the petitioner is under a mistaken impression that appeal does not lie, while the fact remains that appeal lies against the impugned order appointing respondent No.3 as fair price shop dealer of Polaki Village and Mandal, Srikakulam District. Hence, the Writ Petition is dismissed with liberty to the petitioner to avail the remedy of appeal. As a sequel to dismissal of the Writ Petition, WPMP.No.13670 of 2008 filed by the petitioner for interim relief is disposed of as infructuous. ______________________ (C.V.Nagarjuna Reddy, J) 2nd May 2008 lur