IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction) FRIDAY, THE TWENTY EIGHTH DAY OF MARCH TWO THOUSAND AND EIGHT PRESENT THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE C.V.NAGARJUNA REDDY WRIT PETITION NO : 6640 of 2008 Between: 1 A. Dayanand, S/o. Rangaiah R/o. 3-5-11, Mudamgalli, Kamareddy, Nizamabad District. 2 Shamshad Begum W/o. Shaik Mohammed R/o. H.No.4-45/2, Islampur, Kamareddy, Nizamabad District. 3 Sabera Begum W/o. Yousuf Syed R/o. H.No.3-4-48/2, Hanumangalli, Kamareddy, Nizamabad District. 4 K. Malliah S/o. Chinna Venkaiah R/o. H.No.6-119, Rajampet, Kamareddy, Nizamabad District. 5 M. Subba Rao S/o. Kona Reddy, R/o. H.No.2-63-58, Pedda Bazar, Kamareddy, Nizamabad District. ..... PETITIONERS AND 1 The Territorial Manager (LPG), Bharat Petroleum Corporation Limited, Charlapally, Hyderbad. 2 The Secretary, Petroleum and National Gas Department (MOP&NG), Union of India, New Delhi. 3 The Vice Chairman and Managing Director, A.P. State Civil Supplies Corporation Limited, Civil Supplies Bhavan, Errummanzil, Hyderabad. 4 Tlhe District Manager, Civil Supplies Corporation, Nizamabad. .....RESPONDENTS Counsel for the Petitioners:MR.D.BALA KISHAN RAO Counsel for Respondent No.1: MR.O.MANOHER REDDY The Court made the following : ORDER: This writ petition is filed for a writ of mandamus to declare that the petitioners are entitled to continue their gas distribution with the present distributors namely, Laxmi Harika Bharat Gas Agency and Balaji Gas Agency at Kamareddy. Heard Sri D.Balakishan Rao, learned counsel for the petitioners and Sri O.Manohar Reddy, learned Standing Counsel for respondent No.1. In the affidavit filed in support of the writ petition, the petitioners averred that the Andhra Pradesh Civil Supplies Corporation (for short ‘the Corporation’), which was earlier distributing gas to the petitioners, was discontinued and the petitioners were attached to the above two agencies for supply of gas. They have further stated that recently they came to learn that the Bharat Petroleum Corporation Limited decided to restore the distribution agency of the Corporation and that there is a further proposal to transfer the petitioners’ connections to the said Corporation. The only grievance of the petitioners is that in the event of transfer of their connections to the said Corporation, they will suffer severe inconvenience since the said Corporation may not ensure home delivery of gas cylinders. Sri O.Manohar Reddy, learned Standing Counsel for respondent No.1 stated that supplies by the Corporation were discontinued earlier for the reason of expiry of explosive license and that the same has now been revived and respondent No.1, therefore, decided to restore the distribution agency to the said Corporation. He further stated that there is no basis for the apprehension of the petitioners that the said Corporation will not ensure home delivery of gas cylinders. He stated that home delivery of gas cylinders is one of the requisite conditions of distribution agency and hence, the said Corporation is bound to make home delivery of the gas cylinders. In view of the submission of the learned Standing Counsel, the grievance expressed by the petitioners in the writ petition, if any, no longer survives. The writ petition is, therefore, dismissed. As a sequel to dismissal of main petition, WPMP.No.8666 of 2008 filed by the petitioners for interim relief is also dismissed. C.V. NAGARJUNA REDDY, J 28th MARCH, 2008 kvni