IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction) MONDAY, THE TWENTY FOURTH DAY OF AUGUST TWO THOUSAND AND NINE PRESENT THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE GOPALA KRISHNA TAMADA WRIT PETITION NO : 17513 of 2009 Between: Singisala Prasad . .Petitioner And District Collector, Khammam District at Khammam and others .. Respondents THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE GOPALA KRISHNA TAMADA WRIT PETITION NO.17513 OF 2009 ORDER : The petitioner filed this writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India seeking a writ of Mandamus seeking to declare the action of the 1st respondent in not passing order on the stay petition presented along with revision by the petitioner against order dated 03.08.2009 in appeal No.D/48/2009 passed by the 2nd respondent as illegal and arbitrary and consequently direct the respondents to continue the petitioner as fair price shop dealer for shop No.14030 of Yerraboinapally-II. 2) According to the petitioner, for the interviews conducted by the appointing authority, the petitioner was selected and accordingly he was appointed as fair price shop dealer for the shop No.14030 of Yerraboinapally-II village by an order dated 06.01.2009. The 5th respondent who was unsuccessful candidate in the said interviews, approached the appellate authority and filed an appeal and the said appeal was allowed by the 2nd respondent, Joint Collector, by his order dated 03.08.2009. Questioning the said order passed by the appellate authority, the petitioner approached the District Collector, the 1st respondent, which is the revisional authority and filed a revision and along with the said revision he also filed an application seeking stay of the said order. But, However, no orders have yet been passed and hence, he approached this Court and filed the present writ petition. 3) According to the learned counsel for the petitioner right from the date of appointment i.e., 06.01.2009, essential commodities were being supplied to the petitioner, who in turn he had been distributing the same to the card holders and now by virtue of the orders passed by the appellate authority on 03.08.2009 and as the said order was neither suspended nor stayed by the revisional authority, the authorities are not supplying the schedule commodities to the petitioner. 4) As the revision petition filed by the petitioner is pending before the revisional authority, the petitioner shall be allowed to supply the schedule commodities to the card holders and such arrangement shall be continued during the pendency of the said revision. 5) Accordingly, the writ petition is allowed at the stage of admission with a direction to the Revisional Authority i.e., respondent No.1 to dispose of the Revision filed by the petitioner herein at the earliest, preferably, within a period of four (4) weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. 6) It is further directed that during the pendency of the said Revision, the petitioner shall be allowed to continue the supply of schedule commodities and respondent No.1 shall afford an opportunity to respondent No.5 herein while disposing of the said Revision. 7) Accordingly, the Writ Petition is allowed. There shall be no order as to costs. _________________________ GOPALA KRISHNA TAMADA, J August 24, 2009 KSH/AMD