IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction) FRIDAY, THE SEVENTH DAY OF AUGUST TWO THOUSAND AND NINE PRESENT THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE GOPALA KRISHNA TAMADA WRIT PETITION NO : 9392 of 2009 Between: 1 K. Anil Kumar, S/o. Koteswara Rao, R/o. Mandadam Village, Thulluru Mandal, Guntur District. 2 Puli Rani, W/o. K. Anil Kumar, R/o. Mandadam Village, Thulluru Mandal, Guntur District. ..... PETITIONERS AND 1 The Revenue Divisional Officer, Guntur. 2 The Joint Collector, Guntur. 3 Puli Anuradha, W/o. Ravi, Mandadam Village, Thulluru Mandal, Guntur 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 will be pleased to issue a Writ, Order or direction more particularly one in the nature of Writ of Mandamus by setting aside the order of 2nd respondent DT. 28-2-2009 in Appeal Case No. 1/2009-S7 in rejecting the stay application of the operation of the order of R.D.O. appointing 3rd respondent as Fair Price shop dealer, as arbitrary, illegal, violative of Principles of natural justice and pass such other order or orders as this Hon’ble Court deem fit and proper in the circumstances of the case. Counsel for the Petitioner: MR.V.V.ANIL KUMAR Counsel for the Respondent No.1 & 2: GP FOR CIVIL SUPPLIES The Court made the following : . THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE GOPALA KRISHNA TAMADA WRIT PETITION No.9392 of 2009 ORDER: This writ petition is filed seeking a Writ of Mandamus declaring the action of the 2nd respondent in passing an order dated 28.02.2009 in Appeal Case No.1/2009-S7 in rejecting the stay application filed by the petitioners, as illegal and arbitrary and consequently set aside the same. The 1st respondent-Revenue Divisional Officer, Guntur, issued a notification R.C.No.1501/2007-G dated 02.09.2008 for filling up the vacancy of Fair Price shop dealer of Mandaam village, Thullur Mandal. The petitioners, 3rd respondent and two others were interviewed on 01.12.2008 and the official respondents selected the 3rd respondent herein for the post of fair price shop dealer and accordingly the 1st respondent issued proceedings on 22.12.2008. Aggrieved by the same, the petitioners filed an appeal before the 2nd respondent-Joint Collector and also moved an application of stay of the impugned order under appeal. The 2nd respondent rejected the stay application. Hence the writ petition. Heard both sides. Having regard to the fact that the appeal is very much pending before the 2nd respondent, this Court is of the view that it may not be necessary for this Court to go into the merits as convassed by the learned Counsel for the petitioners. He can as well advance the very same arguments before the 2nd respondent and the 2nd respondent will appreciate the same and pass necessary orders. The writ petition is accordingly disposed of with a direction to the 2nd respondent-Joint Collector to dispose of the appeal filed by the petitioners, after affording an opportunity of hearing to the petitioners as well as to the 3rd respondent, within a period of Six weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. No order as to costs. ____________________________ (GOPALA KRISHNA TAMADA, J) 07-08-2009 Gsn.