The Hon’ble Sri Justice R.Subhash Reddy Writ Petition No.20342 of 2010 Order: In this Writ Petition, the petitioner has questioned notification in Rc.No.423/2009, dated 01-03-2010, issued by respondent No.4, to fill up the vacancy of fair price shop dealership of shop No.16 of Jammavaram (V), A.S.Peta (M), SPS Nellore District. The petitioner sought for a consequential direction to the respondents to renew her authorization in respect of the said shop. It is the case of the petitioner that initially, she was appointed as a temporary dealer for distribution of essential commodities of the above-mentioned fair price shop and that thereafter, she was issued authorization vide Proceedings in Rc.C 1013/2006, dated 01-10-2007, in the prescribed format. Her grievance is that ignoring her appointment as such, respondent No.4 has issued the impugned notification and appointed respondent No.6 in her place. Hence, she filed the present Writ Petition. I have perused the impugned authorization issued in terms of Rule 5 (5) of the Andhra Pradesh Scheduled Commodities (Regulation of Distribution by Card System) Order, 2001, wherein it is clearly stated that the petitioner’s appointment is temporary. On instructions, it is submitted by the learned Government Pleader appearing for the respondents that as the earlier permanent dealer of the fair price shop in question has resigned, a temporary arrangement for distribution of essential commodities thereof was made by appointing the petitioner; that in order to fill up the said vacancy, the impugned notification was issued, by reserving the same for candidates belonging to BC community; that in response thereto, five candidates have applied and that finally, respondent No.6 was selected. Although it is the case of the petitioner that she is an authorized dealer of the fair price shop in question, it is to be noted that the same is only a temporary arrangement made in view of the resignation of the earlier permanent dealer. As seen from the impugned notification, the same was issued in terms of G.O.Ms.No.52 C.A.F & C.S. (C.S.I) Dept., dated 18-12-2008, by reserving the vacancy for candidates belonging to BC community. Even according to the petitioner, she does not fit into the eligibility criteria prescribed therein. Inasmuch as the petitioner’s authorization was temporary and as the impugned notification was issued as per GO.Ms.No.52, dated 18-12- 2008, as early as 01-03-2010 and as the selection process is completed and respondent No.6 has also been appointed in the said vacancy, I do not find any reason to interfere with the impugned notification issued by respondent No.4. The Writ Petition is therefore dismissed. There shall be no order as to costs. _________________ R.Subhash Reddy, J Date: 17th August, 2010 lur