IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction) PRESENT: THE HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE C.V.NAGARJUNA REDDY WEDNESDAY, THE EIGHTH DAY OF DECEMBER, TWO THOUSAND AND TEN WRIT PETITION No.30848 of 2010 Between: G.Kavitha. … Petitioner And The Distirct Collector. Civil Supplies, Nalgonda District, Nalgonda and others. … Respondents Counsel for the petitioner: Sri K.Ashok Reddy. Counsel for the respondents: AGP for Civil Supplies. This Court made the following: ORDER:- This Writ Petition is filed for a Mandamus to declare the action of the respondents in not supplying commodities to the petitioner and keeping another fair price shop dealer as in charge of the fair price shop of Dasaigudem village, Suryapet Revenue Mandal, as illegal and arbitrary. I have heard Sri K.Ashok Reddy, learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned Assistant Government Pleader for Civil Supplies. The petitioner is representative of a DWAKRA group. Consequent on arising of permanent vacancy in the fair price shop dealership of the above mentioned village, the petitioner was temporarily appointed as a dealer for a period of three months under order dated 15-2-2006 of respondent No.2. It is the pleaded case of the petitioner that even after expiry of the period of three months, she has been continued all the while as a fair price shop dealer, without formal extension of her appointment, till she was denied allotment of the essential commodities from the month of November, 2010. Feeling aggrieved by the discontinuance of allotment of commodities to the petitioner, she has filed the present Writ Petition. The learned Assistant Government Pleader for Civil Supplies, after taking time for obtaining instructions till after the lunch recess, has reported to the Court that though no specific allegations are made against the petitioner in distribution of the essential commodities, on the direction given by the Joint Collector, Nalgonda District, to discontinue all the persons, who are permitted to distribute essential commodities without specific authorizations, the petitioner is discontinued. The fact that the permanent vacancy is not filled up, is not in dispute. Even though the petitioner’s appointment was for a period of three months, she was continued for more than four years. It is not understandable as to why the respondents have not taken steps to fill up the vacancy on permanent basis. Instead, a temporary dealer is being continued for too long a time. In such a situation, I do not find any justification to replace the temporary dealer with a neighbouring dealer through in-charge arrangement. Having continued the petitioner for more than four years and in the absence of any allegations against her in distribution of essential commodities, the respondents ought to have continued her till the vacancy is filled up on permanent basis. In this view of the matter, the Writ Petition is disposed of with a direction to the respondents to allow the petitioner to function as fair price shop dealer of Dasaigudem village, Suryapet Revenue Mandal, till the said vacancy is filled up on permanent basis. Respondent No.2 is further directed to take immediate steps for notifying the vacancy and filling the same on permanent basis in accordance with law. He shall complete this exercise within a period of three months. ------------------------------ --------- C.V.NAGARJUNA REDDY,J Date:8-12-2010 Note: Issue CC in two days. (BO) MNR