IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction) MONDAY, THE THIRTEENTH DAY OF JUNE TWO THOUSAND AND FIVE PRESENT THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE V.V.S.RAO WRIT PETITION No.11808 of 2004 Between: V.Santhi Bai D/o. V.Lakshmi Rama Naik, Aged about 28 years, F.P.Shop Dealer, Vanavolu Thanda, Gorantla Mandal, Ananthapur District. ..... PETITIONER AND 1 The Mandal Revenue Oflficer, Gorantla Mandal, Ananthapur District. 2 The Joint Collector, Ananthapur, Ananthapur 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 a writ, order or direction more particularly one in the nature of a writ of mandamus declaring the action of the 1st respondent in insisting the petitioner to resign the F.P.Shop Dealership and harassing the petitioner in taking demand drafts for F.P.Shop Vanavolu thanda, Gorantla Mandal, Anantapur District as arbitrary illegal and violative of Article 21 of the Constitution of India and consequently direct the respondents not to harass the petitioners for resignation of F.P.Shop Dealership and taking demand drafts for F.P.Shop, Vanavolu Thanda, Gorantla Mandal, Anantapur District. Counsel for the Petitioner: MR.K. MAHESWARA RAO Counsel for the Respondents: GP FOR CIVIL SUPPLIES The Court made the following: ORDER: The petitioner is a fair price shop dealer of Vanavolu Thanda, Gorantla Mandal, Ananthapur District. She filed the writ petition seeking a writ of Mandamus declaring the action of the first respondent allegedly asking the petitioner to resign as illegal and arbitrary. This Court while admitting the writ petition passed interim orders directing the respondents to receive the demand draft and supply essential commodities. The respondents have now moved application for vacating the interim order. As the controversy is a narrow compass, this matter was heard finally and the writ petition is being disposed of by this order. The counter affidavit filed by the first respondent denied all the allegations made by the petitioner. It is also stated that the petitioner was never prevented from discharging her duties as a fair price shop dealer of Vanavolu Thanda and that the petitioner has already deposited necessary amount by way of demand draft in the month of June, 2004. The petitioner has not filed reply affidavit denying the counter affidavit. Therefore this Court holds that the writ petition is filed without any proper cause of action. The writ petition, for the above reasons, is dismissed. _____________ (V.V.S.RAO,J) June 13, 2005. YS To 1 The Mandal Revenue Oflficer, Gorantla Mandal, Ananthapur District. 2 The Joint Collector, Ananthapur, Ananthapur District. 3 Two CCs to the Government Pleader for Civil Supplies, High Court Buildings, Hyderabad. (OUT) 4 Two C.D. Copies.