IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction) FRIDAY, THE SECOND DAY OF MAY TWO THOUSAND AND EIGHT PRESENT THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE V.ESWARAIAH WRIT PETITION No: 7373 of 2005 BETWEEN: K. Venkataswamy, S/o Balaswamy, R/o Manchalakatta Village, Kollapur Mandal, Mahabubnagar District. ... PETITIONER AND 1.The Joint Collector, Mahabubnagar District, Mahabubnagar. 2.The Revenue Divisional Officer, Nagarkurnool, Mahabubnagar District. 3.R.Venkataswamy, S/o. Ramulu, Manchalakatta Village, Kollapur Mandal, Mahabubnagar District. ...RESPONDENTS Petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying that in the circumstances stated in the Affidavit filed herein the High Court may be pleased to issue a writ, or order or direction more particularly in the nature of writ of mandamus to call for records relating to Case No.CS1/29/1999, dated 05-03-2005 on the file of the 1st respondent and set aside the same by declaring it as illegal and violative of Articles 14, 19 & 20 of Constitution of India and in consequence thereof to direct the official respondents to appoint the petitioner as Fair Price Shop Dealer of Manchalakatta Village, Kollapur Mandal, Mahabubnagar District and to pass such other order or orders as this Hon'ble Court may deems fit and proper in the circumstances of the case. Counsel for the Petitioner: Sri V.V.NARASIMHA RAO Counsel for the Respondents 1 & 2: GP FOR CIVIL SUPPLIES Counsel for the Respondent No.3: MR. S. PURENDER REDDY The Court made the following: ORDER: Petitioner questions the order of the Joint Collector dated 05.03.2005 in Case No.CS1/29/1999 in setting aside his appointment as fair price shop dealer of Manchalakatta Village, Kollapur Mandal, Mahabubnagar District. 2. Counter has been filed stating that the petitioner was appointed as fair price shop dealer by the proceedings of the Revenue Divisional Officer dated 23.10.1998 and against the said order the third respondent filed an appeal before the Joint Collector and the appellate authority found that the petitioner himself tendered resignation to the said dealership to the RDO on the ground that he has criminal antecedents; therefore, it is not desirable to appoint him as fair price shop dealer. Accordingly, the order of the RDO appointing the petitioner as fair price shop dealer was set aside directing the RDO to take appropriate further action to re-notify for appointment of dealer in accordance with law. 3. I have perused the records. Admittedly the petitioner was convicted in STC.No.73 of 1996 on the file of the Judicial First Class Magistrate, Kollapur by order dated 04.09.1996 and a fine of Rs.100/- was imposed in default to undergo simple imprisonment for 15 days. Therefore, it cannot be said that the petitioner has no criminal antecedents. Subsequently, the petitioner was also involved in S.C.No.343 of 2000 on the file of Lokadalat for outraging the modesty of a woman and the said case ended in compromise and the petitioner was acquitted. 4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that a condition was imposed by the complainant in the above case, seeking the petitioner to resign the fair price shop dealership, for compromising the said case; therefore, the petitioner tendered his resignation. 5. If that be so, I am of the opinion that the petitioner having voluntarily resigned and compromised the criminal case, it is not open to the petitioner to turn out and contend that he has no criminal antecedents, more so, when he was convicted earlier in STC.No.73 of 1996 by order dated 04.09.1996. Therefore, the petitioner is not entitled to any relief in the writ petition. The writ petition is accordingly dismissed. There shall be no order as to costs. ______________ V. ESWARAIAH, J May 2, 2008 DSK