IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction) THURSDAY, THE TWENTY EIGHTH DAY OF AUGUST TWO THOUSAND AND EIGHT PRESENT THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE GODA RAGHURAM WRIT PETITION NO : 18678 of 2008 Between: Gilaka Bhanu Karthik S/o.Venkataiah R/o.D.No.B1/72, Pattabhi Puram, 2nd Lane, Guntur-6. ..... PETITIONER AND 1 The Joint Collector, Guntur District. 2 The Revenue Divisional Officer, Guntur, Guntur District. 3 The Tahsildar, Guntur City and Mandal, Guntur District. 4 Smt.Kilari Padma W/o.Nageswar Rao R/o.D.No.7-11-77, Kakumanuvari Thota, 2nd lane, Guntur. .....RESPONDENTS 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 a writ, order or a direction, more particularly one in the nature of Writ of Mandamus declaring the orders in Rc.No.59/2006-G, dated 31.5.2008 issued by the 2nd respondent-Revenue Divisional Oﬃcer, Guntur, as being arbitrary, illegal, unreasonable, irregular, erroneous and contrary to the orders of the Government issued in G.O.Ms.No.53, dated 8.10.2003 and set-aside the same and issue a consequential direction directing the respondents to consider and appoint the petitioner as Fair Price Shop Dealer of Circle-VIII of Guntur City, Guntur District and pass such further or other orders. Counsel for the Petitioner:MR.P.LAKSHMA REDDY Counsel for the Respondents 1 to 3: GP FOR CIVIL SUPPLIES Counsel for the Respondent No.4: None The Court made the following : THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE GODA RAGHURAM WRIT PETITION NO :18678 of 2008 ORDER: By an order of the 2nd respondent dated 31.5.2008, the 4th respondent was granted authorization for the fair price shop in Survey No.8 of Guntur Town pursuant to a notiﬁcation, for which, the petitioner, the 4th respondent and others had applied. The 4th respondent was preferred over the petitioner. In respect of the petitioner, it is recorded in the impugned order that he is studying Engineering at present; is aged 20 years and therefore his candidature is rejected. Petitioner states that he is not pursuing Engineering Course at present. Against the order of the 2nd respondent dated 31.5.2008, which the petitioner claims was received on 21.8.2008, the petitioner states to have preferred an appeal to the 1st respondent on 22.8.2008 itself and has yet filed this writ petition four days later on 26.8.2008 challenging the order of the 2nd respondent dated 31.5.2008, granting authorization to the 4th respondent. The petitioner cannot be permitted to pursue parallel remedies. Since the petitioner has availed the appellate remedy, he is relegated to pursue the said remedy. The writ petition is accordingly dismissed. No costs. ____________________ GODA RAGHURAM,J DATE: 28th August, 2008 Pnb