POLINENI RAGHAVARAO Vs. JOINT COLLECTOR PRAKASHAM DIST ONGOLE

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The petitioner has an alternative remedy by way of revision against the impugned order before the District Collector. The petitioner was selected as a fair price shop dealer by the Revenue Divisional Officer. Against the order, the fourth respondent preferred an appeal before the Joint Collector. The Joint Collector allowed the appeal. The petitioner questions the jurisdiction of the Joint Collector to pass the order allowing the appeal filed by the fourth respondent.

(2.) The contention of the petitioner with regard to jurisdiction to pass the impugned order cannot be accepted. The Joint collector has certainly got jurisdiction to sit in appeal against the orders made by the Revenue Divisional Officer. In the case of fair price shops, when interviews are held, one person has to be selected, The other person who is not selected is the aggrieved person. He has got a right of appeal against the order of selection. In this case, the petitioner, being the aggrieved person is entitled to file an appeal against the impugned order against the concerned authority.

(3.) It is lastly contended by the learned Counsel for the petitioner that the Joint Collector took two different stands with regard to educational qualifications. The petitioner is at liberty to raise this contention before the revisional authority. He is given fifteen days time from today to file a revision. Status quo as on today be continued for one month. The revisional authority is directed to dispose of the revision within one month from the date of filing of objections to be filed by the petitioner.