IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction) MONDAY, THE TWENTY THIRD DAY OF JUNE TWO THOUSAND AND EIGHT PRESENT THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE GODA RAGHURAM WRIT PETITION NO : 27428 of 2007 Between: R. Sekhar S/o K. Ramaswamy Mudaliar Thungundram Village and Post, G.D. Nellore Mandal, Chittoor District. ..... PETITIONER AND 1 The Government of A.P., rep by its Principal Secreary, Civil Supplies Department, Secretariat, at Hyderabad. 2 The Director of Civil Supplies, Andhra Pradesh, Somajiguda, Hyderabad. 3 District Collector (Civil Supplies), Chittoor, Chittoor District. 4 Revenue Divisional Officer, Chittoor. 5 The Tahsildar, G.D. Nellore, Ghittoor 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 an appropriate Writ, order or direction, preferably one in the nature of Writ of mandamus, declaring the bifurcation order passed by the 3rd respondent in his proceedings D. Dis./C1/564/07, bifurcating the existing Fair Price Shop of thugundram Village, G.D. Nellore Mandal, Chittoor District into two shops viz., F.P., Shop of Thugundram with 350 Cards and F.P. Shop of Pillarikuppam with 189 cars, as confirmed by the order or the 2nd respondentm dated 23-11-2007 in Appeal No. N1/6121/2007 as arbitrary, illegal, violative of Principles of natural justice and also violative of Article 19(1)(g0 of the Constitution of India and consequently direct the respondents to permit the petitioner to carry one his F.P. Shop with 572 cards as usual and pass suchother or further orders as are necessary. Counsel for the Petitioner:MR.J.KANAKAIAH Counsel for the Respondent No.: GP FOR CIVIL SUPPLIES The Court made the following: THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE GODA RAGHURAM WRIT PETITION NO : 27428 of 2007 ORAL ORDER: The petitioner is aggrieved by the action of the respondents, in particular the third respondent in issuing an order dated 13-08-2007 bifurcating the existing fair price shop at Thugundram authorized to him with 539 cards into two shops, retaining 350 cards with the petitioner and allotting 189 cards to the newly created shop. The petitioner asserts that the Commissioner of Civil Supplies issued a circular order dated 23- 08-2005 directing the Collector (CS) or the Chief Rationing Officer, Hyderabad to keep in view the viability of fair price shops and to ensure as far as possible that the minimum specified number of cards should be allotted to each fair price shop. The Commissioner of Civil Supplies issued another set of circular instructions on 27-07-2007 directing the Collectors (CS) and the Chief Rationing Officer not to create new fair price shops till further guidelines are received from the Government. Therefore, the order of bifurcation issued by the third respondent is illegal, is the case of the petitioner. Aggrieved by the order dated 13-08-2007 of the third respondent, the petitioner preferred an appeal to the second respondent. By the order dated 23-1-2007, the second respondent disposed of the appeal. As is apparent from the appellate order of the second respondent, the villagers of Thugundram AAW, Thatimakula Kandriga, Thatimakula Kandriga AAW, Pillarikuppam and Balaiah Kothur had requested for sanction of a separate Fair Price Shop to their villages as the existing fair price shop is more than two kilo meters away from their villages and causing inconvenience to draw the essential commodities. The concerned Tahasildar had sent up a report recommending sanction of a new fair price shop. Consequent on such recommendation, the Revenue Divisional Officer, Chittoor had also recommended for bifurcation of existing fair price shop and the third respondent on considering the entire material had issued the order dated 13-08-2007 for bifurcation of the fair price shop. The circular instructions issued by the Commissioner of Civil Supplies are neither linear nor inflexible. They are in the nature of administrative instructions intended to contour the discretion of the Collector to the need for ensuring viability of fair price shops. It requires to be noticed that authorizees of fair price shop are not the exclusive intended beneficiaries of the public distribution system. They are collateral beneficiaries of the State policy which is meant primarily to ensure efficacious supply of essential commodities to the public. Considered in this policy matrix the petitioner cannot gainfully urge that he should have been continued with all the ration cards as initially allotted to him notwithstanding the grave inconvenience caused to the villagers of the adjoining villages in the matter of drawing essential commodities. On the analysis above, the action of the third respondent in bifurcating the fair price shop into two and the action of the second respondent in dismissing the appeal suffer from no error warranting interference under Article 226 of the Constitution of India. There are no merits. The writ petition is dismissed accordingly after hearing the learned Government Pleader for Civil Supplies appearing for respondents also. No cost. ____________________ GODA RAGHURAM, J Dated: 23-06-2008 Pvks/*