IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction) PRESENT THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE P.S.NARAYANA W.P.NO.27958 OF 2009. Date:21.01.2010 Between:- Golla Anuja ..Petitioner And The Sub Collector and Revenue Divisional Officer, Vikarabad Division, Vikarabad, Ranga Reddy District. .. Respondent ORDER:- This Court ordered notice before admission on 22.12.2009. 2. Learned Assistant Government Pleader for Civil Supplies representing respondent would submit that the respondent issued only a show cause notice to the petitioner and till now, he did not pass any order. He also would maintain that in the light of the explanation submitted by the petitioner in this regard, let the respondent pass appropriate orders. The same is recorded. 3. The writ petition is filed seeking a writ of mandamus to declare the illegal action of the respondent for non-issuing the appointment order to the petitioner for the dealership of fair price shop at Thimmareddypalli village, Nawabpet Mandal, Ranga Reddy District by not following G.O.Ms.No.52 CAF & CS (CS.I) Department dated 18.12.2008 as illegal, arbitrary, improper and consequently direct the respondent to issue authorization to the petitioner’s fair price shop forthwith and pass such other suitable orders. 4. It is the case of the petitioner that for appointment of fair price shop dealership of Thimmareddypalli village, as per notification No.I/1605/2009 dated 03.10.2009, she attended for interview and also the written test. Several other factors have been narrated in the affidavit filed in support of the writ petition. It is stated that the petitioner, as per law, is entitled to be appointed as fair price shop dealer. The objections raised in relation to the husband and the mother-in-law are totally unsustainable, especially in the light of the explanation submitted in this regard. It is not in serious controversy that an explanation already had been submitted by the petitioner to the show cause notice issued by the respondent. 5. However, it is stated by Sri B.Lingaiah Yadav, the learned counsel representing the petitioner that under the guise of the show cause notice calling for explanation, virtually, the matter had been pre-determined and the view of the respondent is to appoint another person. The counsel would also submit that none of the objections raised have sustainable objections and appropriate direction may be given by this Court itself to make such appointment. 6. These aspects also may be considered by the respondent while deciding the issue in controversy. Let the respondent pass appropriate orders in this regard within a period of two (2) weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order, and till an appropriate order is passed in this regard, considering the case of the petitioner especially in the light of the explanation submitted by the petitioner already, let not any appointment be issued in favour of any other party whatsoever. 7. The writ petition is disposed of accordingly. There shall be no order as to costs. _​_____________ P.S.NARAYANA, J 21st January, 2010 AMD