VIKRAM SIMHA REDDY Vs. GOVERNMENT OF ANDHRA PRADESH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) IN this batch of writ petitions, orders appointing fair price shop dealers in the two Revenue Divisions of Kurnool District, viz., Nandyal and Kurnool, are called in question. As common issues are involved in all these writ petitions, they are heard and being disposed of by this common judgment.

(2.) IN pursuance of the individual notifications issued by the Revenue Divisional Officers concerned (hereinafter referred to as "the Appointing Authorities"), the petitioners applied for appointment as fair price shop dealers. By the time of their making applications, many of the petitioners were working as fair price shop dealers on temporary basis. Some temporary dealers filed writ petitions, viz., Writ Petition No.5458 of 2010 and batch, questioning the respective individual notifications pertaining to the shops with respect to which they held temporary authorizations. The said batch was dismissed by a learned Single Judge of this Court by order dated 10.3.2010. The temporary dealers, feeling aggrieved by order dated 10.3.2010 of the learned Single Judge in Writ Petition No.5458 of 2010 and batch dismissing their writ petitions, filed Writ Appeal No.221 of 2010 and batch. The Division Bench, while affirming the reasoning of the learned Single Judge that the temporary dealers have no right to question the notifications issued for making permanent appointments, placed on record the submission of the learned Government Pleader for Civil Supplies that while replacing the temporary dealers, the appointing authorities will not indulge in pick and choose methods and that all the temporary dealers will be replaced by regular dealers. The Division Bench also made it clear that dismissal of the writ appeals should not work as an impediment for the appellants to prosecute their causes against their selections and that the order was limited to the extent of basic notification only and does not deal with any final selection. Following dismissal of the writ petitions and writ appeals referred to above, the appointing authorities went ahead with the selection process.

(3.) I have heard Sri K.V.N. Bhupal, Sri K.V. Raghuveer, Smt. K. Hemalatha and Sri Koneti Raja Reddy, learned Counsel appearing for the petitioners in their respective writ petitions; the learned Government Pleader for Civil Supplies appearing for the official respondents; Ms. Naga Niyatha, Sri D.L. Pandu, and Sri P. Nagendra Reddy, learned Counsel appearing for some of the private respondents.