HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE R. SUBHASH REDDY WRIT PETITION No.25944 of 2008 Date : 14.09.2011 Between : Thellapudi Padmavathi. …..Petitioner And The District Collector (C.S), Sri Pottisreeramulu Nellore District & others. …..Respondents HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE R. SUBHASH REDDY WRIT PETITION No.25944 of 2008 ORDER : In this writ petition, the petitioner has questioned the order, dated 07.11.2008, issued by the 1st respondent- District Collector in Proceedings RC.E.No.1030/2008. By the aforesaid order, the District Collector has approved the proposals for bifurcation of the existing fair price shop into two shops in Vavilla village of Vidavalur Mandal, Nellore District. Having regard to the number of cards attached to the shop of the petitioner and as per the guidelines issued by the Government, proposals were sent by the Tahsildar, Vidavalur Mandal, for bifurcation of existing fair price shop in Vavilla village into two shops. Said proposals were approved by the District Collector by the impugned order. Before bifurcation, total number of cards attached to the shop of the petitioner were 942, out of which, 767 are white cards, 60 AAY cards, 4 AV cards and 111 pink cards. After bifurcation, the District Collector has approved the proposal for creation of one more shop, with equal number of cards i.e. 471 cards to each shop. This writ petition is filed on the ground that the said bifurcation proposals approved by the Collector are not in accordance with the guidelines issued by the Government itself in G.O.Ms.No.35, dated 17.09.2007, and the petitioner was also not given any notice before approving the bifurcation proposals. It is contended by the learned counsel for petitioner that as per the guidelines issued by the Government in G.O.Ms.No.35, dated 17.09.2007, in rural areas, there must be a minimum of 400 to 450 BPL cards and 50 pink cards for each shop. In that view of the matter, bifurcation made by the District Collector by retaining only 471 cards to each shop, is contrary to the guidelines issued under Clause 5(a) of the aforesaid G.O. It is further submitted that no notice was issued to the petitioner before issuing the bifurcation proceedings. The learned counsel, in support of his argument, has placed reliance on an unreported judgment of a learned Single Judge of this Court, dated 14.10.2008, in W.P.No.11045 of 2008. In this case, it is not in dispute that before bifurcation, total number of cards attached to the petitioner’s shop was 942. The petitioner claims that she is entitled for retention of 400 to 450 BPL and 50 pink cards as per the guidelines notified by the Government in G.O.Ms.No.35, dated 17.09.2007. In this connection, it is appropriate to refer to guideline No.6(v) of the guidelines issued in the aforesaid G.O., which reads as under : “Rural areas – Each Gram Panchayat (v) should have at least one F.P. shop with a minimum of 400 BPL cards and 50 APL cards. In case, there are more number of cards in excess of the minimum number of cards i.e. 400 BPL and 50 APL in a village, there can be two FP Shops, provided the total number of BPL cards in that village is not less than 600 and the number of BPL and APL cards should be attached to the two Fair Price Shops equally”. From a perusal of the aforesaid guideline, it is clear that where the number of BPL cards are more than 600 in a village, it is permissible for the respondents to have two shops by dividing the cards in equal number to the old shop and the newly created shop. It is true that if only one shop is there, ordinarily, to meet the economic viability, 400 BPL cards are to be attached to it, but when there are more than 600 BPL cards under one fair price shop, the aforesaid guideline applies. In that view of the matter, as more than 600 BPL cards are attached to the petitioner’ shop, the impugned proceedings are issued, attaching equal number of cards to the petitioner’s shop as well as the newly created shop, which is in accordance with the guidelines issued by the Government in the aforesaid G.O., but not in derogation of the said guidelines. Though the learned counsel for petitioner has relied on the judgment in W.P.No.11045 of 2008, it is to be noticed that in the aforesaid judgment, a learned Single Judge of this Court has held that where the cards attached to a particular shop exceeds the minimum number of cards i.e. 400 BPL and 50 APL cards, it is open to the District Collector to order for bifurcation without notice to the existing dealer. Further, it is to be noticed that what should be the number of shops having regard to the number of cards, is a matter totally under the administrative control of the Government, but not for the dealer to decide on the said aspect. As the petitioner is holding only an authorization for distribution of essential commodities, he has no legal right for retention of particular number of cards. For the aforesaid reasons, the writ petition is devoid of merit and it is accordingly dismissed. No costs. ______________________ R. SUBHASH REDDY, J 14th September 2011 ajr