IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction) FRIDAY, THE TWENTY SECOND DAY OF AUGUST TWO THOUSAND AND EIGHT PRESENT THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE GODA RAGHURAM WRIT PETITION NO : 18330 of 2008 Between: 1 Kandika Durgaiah S/o. Mallaiah Gudur Mandal, Warangal District. 2 Kandika Illaiah S/o. Muthaiah Gudur Mandal, Warangal District. ..... PETITIONER(S) AND 1 The district Collector (CS), Warangal District. 2 The Revenue Divisional Officer, Narsampet, Warangal District. 3 The Tahsildar, Gudur, Warangal 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 appropriate writ or order or direction more particularly one in nature of writ of Mandamus declaring the action of the Respondents in condusting the enquiry for creation two more fair price shops in Gundenga Village, Gudur Mandal, Warangal District as illegal, arbitrary and against the principles of natural justice and consequently set aside the Proceedings RC No.B/474/2008 dated 08-07-2008 passed by the REspondent No.2 and pass Counsel for the Petitioner:MR.P.GIRI KRISHNA Counsel for the Respondent No.: GP FOR CIVIL SUPPLIES The Court made the following : ORAL ORDER: The writ petition is misconceived. It is directed against a demi-official communication addressed by the 2nd respondent to the 3rd respondent calling upon the 3rd respondent to conduct an enquiry into the representation submitted by the villagers of Gundenga Village of Gudur Mandal, Warangal District seeking creation of additional fair price shops, in addition to the two existing shops, in view of the represented grievance that the shops are at a considerable distance from their habitation. The direction by the 2nd respondent to the 3rd respondent is purely an administrative process which by itself impacts the petitioners with no adverse consequences. After a report is sent by the 3rd respondent as directed by the 2nd respondent, qua the order dated 8-7-2008, the matter will have to be considered by the competent authority i.e., the District Collector who will consider the entire issue both with regard to the viability of the existing shops as well as the need of the villagers of Gundenga for a more efficient public distribution system through fair price shops. On a balancing of competing interests, the Collector would take a decision whether to create additional fair price shops. The letter dated 8-7-2008 of the 2nd respondent is merely a direction to the 3rd respondent to conduct an enquiry on the representation of the villagers and to submit a report. It is not an order, which is susceptible to judicial review under Article 226 of the Constitution of India. The grievance and the relief are misconceived as is the writ petition. The writ petition is dismissed at the stage of admission. There shall be no order as to costs. ________________________ GODA RAGHURAM, J 22nd August, 2008. GRR