IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction) WEDNESDAY, THE SEVENTH DAY OF JANUARY TWO THOUSAND AND NINE PRESENT THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE V.ESWARAIAH WRIT PETITION NO : 69 of 2009 Between: J.Bagha Goud, S/o.Laxma Goud, J.Lingapoor Village, Ramayampet Mandal, Medak District. ..... PETITIONER AND 1 The Government of A.P. Civil Supplies Department, Secretariat, represented by its Secretary, Hyderabad. 2 The Revenue Divisional Officer, Medak, Medak District. 3 The Tahsildar, Ramayampet, Medak District. .....RESPONDENTS Petition under Article 226 of the constitution of India praying that in the circumstances stated in the Affidavit filed herein the High Court may be pleased to issue any appropriate writ, order or direction, more particularly one in the nature of Writ of Mandamus declaring the Notification No. J/3841/2008 dated 18.12.2008 of the 2nd respondent herein as illegal, arbitrary and violation of principles of natural justice and against the guidelines framed in G.O.Ms.No.35 dated 17.9.2007 and set aside the same and consequently direct the respondents not to create or establish the 2nd shop at Jhansi Lingapur Village, Ramayampet Mandal, Medak District, and pass such other order or orders. Counsel for the Petitioner: SRI CH.JANARDHAN REDDY Counsel for the Respondents: GP FOR CIVIL SUPPLIES The Court made the following : THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE V.ESWARAIAH WRIT PETITION No.69 of 2009 ORDER: In the present writ petition, the petitioner questions the notification, dated 18.12.2008, issued by the 2nd respondent-Revenue Divisional Officer, Medak. According to the petitioner, he is the dealer of Fair Price Shop of Jhansi Lingapur village, Ramayampet Mandal, Medak District. It is his case that the impugned notification has been issued for filling up the post of dealer of Fair Price Shop No.2 of the same village, which has been created by bifurcating the existing shop for which he is the authorized dealer. It is his grievance that the impugned notification has been issued without following due procedure, apart from its being contrary to the guidelines issued in G.O.Ms.No.35, dated 17.09.2007. It is not a newly created or bifurcated shop. It is an existing shop fallen vacant. Vacancy is sought to be filled up. I am of the opinion that so far as the dealership of shop in question is concerned, the petitioner has no say and it cannot be said that by the issuance of the impugned notification, his existing or vested rights are infringed. Therefore, when the petitioner has no rights whatsoever to supply the essential commodities through Fair Price Shop in question, he is not entitled to question the allotment of dealership of the same. The writ petition is, accordingly, dismissed. No order as to costs. ____________________ JUSTICE V.ESWARAIAH 07.01.2009 v v/ ibl