IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction) WEDNESDAY, THE TWENTY SIXTH DAY OF AUGUST TWO THOUSAND AND NINE PRESENT THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE GOPALA KRISHNA TAMADA WRIT PETITION NO : 17065 of 2009 Between: B. Harinatha Kumar S/o. Rajanna Shop No.30, Kakarakayalapalle Village, H/o. Valasapalle, Madanapalle Mandal, Chittoor District. ..... PETITIONER AND 1 The Revenue Divisional Officer Madanapalle Chittoor District. 2 The Tahsildar Madanapalle Mandal Chittoor District. .....RESPONDENT(S) 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 any writ, order or direction more particularly one in the nature of WRIT OF MANDAMUS, declaring the action of the respondents in not appointing the petitioner as permanent Fair Price Shop Dealer of Shop No.30 of Kakarakayalapalle, H/o. Valasapalle, Madanapalle Mandal, Chittoor District, as arbitrary and consequently direct the respondents to appoint the petitioner as permanent Fair Price Shop Dealer of Shop No.30 of Kakarakayalapalle H/o. Valasapalle, Madanapalle Mandal, Chittoor District. Counsel for the Petitioner:MR.T.V.S.KUMAR Counsel for the Respondent No.: GP FOR CIVIL SUPPLIES The Court made the following : THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE GOPALA KRISHNA TAMADA WRIT PETITION NO : 17065 of 2009 ORDER: 1 The petitioner was appointed as fair price shop dealer of Kakarakayalapalle, H/o. Valasapalle, Madanapalle Mandal, Chittoor District vide proceedings bearing No.CS/01 Dated 20.06.2001 on temporary basis. Ever since the date of appointment, the petitioner has been distributing the essential commodities to the cardholders in accordance with the provisions of the relevant Control Order. As the same is only on temporary and not on permanent basis, he gave several representations, the latest one is dated 13.7.2009, requesting the authorities to consider his case for issuance of authorization on permanent basis. But, however, as no action has been initiated on the representations given by him, and he is still allowed to continue as fair price shop dealer on temporary basis, he approached this court and filed the present Writ Petition. 2 Heard both sides. 3 The fact that he was appointed as fair price shop dealer on 20.6.2001 on temporary basis is not in dispute and there is also no record to establish that the petitioner had violated any of the provisions of the Control order. When once there are no complaints whatsoever against the petitioner and inasmuch he is distributing the essential commodities to the cardholders strictly in accordance with the provisions of the relevant control order, the respondent authorities should have considered his representations particularly the latest dated 13.7.2009 and passed necessary orders. 4 Accordingly the Writ Petition is disposed of with a direction to the first respondent to consider the said representation given by the petitioner on 13.7.2009 and pass appropriate orders thereon in accordance with the Rules within a period of eight weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. No order as to costs. -------------------- kvsn 26.08.2009