HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE R. SUBHASH REDDY Writ Petition No.27023 of 2009 Date: July 8, 2010 Between: Venkata Kishore Reddy, S/o. V. Pulla Reddy, Aged about 34 years, Fair Price Shop Dealer, Vemareddypalli Village, Nambulipulikunta Mandal, Anantapur District … Petitioner And The Tahsildar, N.P. Kunta Mandal, Anantapur District, and another … Respondents Order: This writ petition is filed seeking Mandamus declaring the action of second respondent in issuing Notification Rc.No.2019/2009/C, dated 01-12-2009, as illegal and arbitrary. The father of the petitioner was appointed as dealer of Fair Price Shop in Vemareddypalli village, Nambulipulikunta Mandal, Anantapur District and after his death, the petitioner was allotted the said shop vide proceedings dated 21-03-2003. It is stated that since then the petitioner has been running the said shop without any complaints from the cardholders. While things stood thus, the impugned notification has been issuing inviting applications for appointment of dealer to the shop in question on permanent basis. It is the case of the petitioner that as much as there are no complaints against him, there is no reason to issue the impugned notification for appointing new dealers for the shop in question. It is submitted by learned counsel for the petitioner that pursuant to the impugned notification, the petitioner has applied for appointment as dealer and interviews have also been conducted, but no appointment orders are issued. It is to be seen that the petitioner was only appointed as temporary dealer for the shop in question in view of the death of his father; as such he cannot claim, as a matter of right, to be appointed as regular dealer. Hence, no relief as sought can be granted. But, however, as it is sated that the petitioner has also applied for appointment as dealer in pursuance of the impugned notification and that interviews have also been conducted, I am sure that the claim of the petitioner will be considered keeping in mind his past service. Further, if the petitioner is continuing as temporary dealer for the shop in question as on today, there shall be a direction to the respondents to continue him as such till regular appointments are made. The writ petition is accordingly disposed of. No order as to costs. ___________________ (R. SUBHASH REDDY, J) July 8, 2010 MRR