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 L.NARASIMHA REDDY WRIT PETITION NO : 10200 of 2008 Between: Panyam Siva Rami Reddy S/o.Venkata Reddy permanent Resident of Gadivemula Post&(M) Kurnool Dist ..... PETITIONER AND 1 I.O.C Ltd Rep.by its Chief Divisional Retail Stores Sales Manager IInd Floor Narpur House Himayatnagar Hyd-29 2 The Divisional Retail Sales Manager Indian Corporatio Ltd Divsional Office D.No.18-8-36E, Madhuranagar Thirupathi Chittoor Dist- 517501 .....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 a writ,order or direction more particularly one in the nature of writ of Mandamus to direct the respondents to consider the petitioner's application dt.7-7-2007 for appointment as KSK opeartor ship at Gadivemula Kurnool Dist in the pursuance to the Notification dt.9-6- 2007 on the file of the 1st respondent by duly taking into consideration of the petitioner representation dt.3-4-2008 by delcaring the action of the respondents in not considering the case of the petitioner for the same as illegal and to pass Counsel for the Petitioner:MR.M.VENKAT RAM REDDY Counsel for the Respondent No.: MR.P.V.SANJAY KUMAR The Court made the following : THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE L.NARASIMHA REDDY WRIT PETITION NO : 10200 of 2008 ORDER: The petitioner submitted an application on 07.07.2007 in response to a notification, dated 09.06.2007, issued by the 1st respondent, for appointment of Kisan Seva Kendra Operators. The petitioner had furnished the particulars of a piece of land, as required under the notification. However, at a later stage, he modified the same, on finding that the title in respect thereof is defective. The petitioner claims to have made a representation, dated 03.04.2008, requesting the respondents to take note of the lands mentioned subsequently and to consider any one of them, in the event of their not being satisfied with the ownership over the land offered in the application at the initial stage. His grievance is that no action has been taken thereon. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned Standing counsel for the respondents. In the application that is to be submitted in response to the notification, several particulars are required to be mentioned. One such item is about the land, where the unit is to be established, in the event of the applicant being selected. In his application, the petitioner furnished the particulars of the land covered by sale deed No.895 of 200,7 dated 06.07.2007. The petitioner himself entertained some doubt as to the acceptability of the said land vis-à-vis his title over it. Therefore, he furnished sale deed Nos.725/92, dated 28.09.1992, and 693/08, dated 02.04.2008, as alternative sites. The question as to whether it is open to an applicant to substitute the lands for location of the unit or whether the alternative lands offered by the petitioner can be accepted, needs to be examined by the respondents. An early communication in this regard would put the uncertainty at rest. Hence, the writ petition is disposed of, directing the respondents to communicate their view point, on the representation, dated 03.04.2008, made by the petitioner, within a period of two (2) weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. There shall be no order as to costs. __________ 02.05.2008 Note: Issue C.C. in three (3) days. (B/o) JSU ..... REGISTRAR // TRUE COPY // SECTION OFFICER To 1.2CCs to 2.2CD copies Form-NIC-OGS/WP{BMR} THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE L.NARASIMHA REDDY WRIT PETITION NO : 10200 of 2008 Date: 02.05.2008 JSU