IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction) WEDNESDAY, THE ELEVENTH DAY OF JUNE TWO THOUSAND AND EIGHT PRESENT THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE V.ESWARAIAH WRIT PETITION No.11836 of 2008 Between: Boyina Sreedevi D/o. Late Venkateswara Rao Secretary of Gramykya Sangam, H.No.1-135, Bommuluru(V), Gudivada (M), Krishna District. ..... PETITIONER AND 1 The Joint Collector, Krishna District, at Machilipatnam. 2 The Revenue Divisional Officer, Gudivada, Krishna District. 3 The Tahasildar, Gudivada (M) at Gudivada, Krishna District. 4 Puvvula Sujana W/o. Gopalakrishna R/o.Bommuluru (V), Gudivada (M), Krishna 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 to issue writ or direction preferably writ of Mandamus declaring the order issued by the 1st respondent in the proceedins Rc.B1/SRA/10/2008, dt. 19.05.2008, as illegal, arbitrary and violative of principles of natural justice and consequently set aside the same and pass Counsel for the Petitioner:MR.KOWTURU VINAYA KUMAR Counsel for the Respondent No.: GP FOR CIVIL SUPPLIES The Court made the following : THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE V.ESWARAIAH WRIT PETITION No.11836 of 2008 ORDER: It is the case of the petitioner that she is a group leader of Dwakra Group and the Dwakra Group has been running Fair Price Shop No.4 of Bommuluru Village, Gudivada Mandal, Krishna District, since February, 2003 on temporary basis and to fill up the said vacancy on permanent basis, notification was called for and that the petitioner, 4th respondent and others have applied for appointment as a fair price shop dealer. It is stated that the 4th respondent was selected and she was appointed as Fair Price Shop dealer vide order, dated 03-05-2008. Questioning the selection of the 4th respondent, the petitioner filed an appeal before the Joint Collector on 06-05- 2008 along with stay application. As the stay application has not been considered and disposed of, the petitioner filed W.P.No.10783 of 2008 before this court and the same was disposed of directing the appellate authority to consider and dispose of the stay application. Pursuant to the order of this court, the 1st respondent while admitting the appeal, rejected the stay application through order, dated 19-05-2008. Questioning the same, this writ petition has been filed contending that Dwakra Group has been distributing essential commodities all through including for the month of May, 2008 and accordingly submits that the existing arrangement may be continued pending disposal of the appeal. I am unable to accept the said contention as the petitioner is not representing the case of Dwakra group but she is representing in her individual capacity. Had the petitioner been selected she would have been authorized to distribute essential commodities. Therefore, when Dwakra Group is not the petitioner, the petitioner is entitled to seek the relief of permitting Dwakra group to distribute essential commodities pending disposal of the appeal filed by the petitioner. However, with regard to the merits of the case, as the appeal is pending, it is just and proper for the appellate authority to consider the rival contentions and the merits of the case. Having regard to the facts and circumstances of the case, the writ petition is disposed of directing the appellate authority to consider and dispose of the appeal as expeditiously as possible preferably within a period of six weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order, after giving reasonable opportunity to the petitioner as well as the 4th respondent. It is needless to observe that the appointment order issued by the 2nd respondent in favour of the 4th respondent will be subject to the result of the final order that may be passed by the Joint Collector. There shall be no order as to costs. ___________ 11-06-2008 Prv ..... REGISTRAR // TRUE COPY // SECTION OFFICER To 1.2CCs to 2.2CD copies Form-NIC-OGS/WP{MSN}