Pallerla Gangadhar and Others Vs. the State of Andhra Pradesh, Rep. by Its - Court Judgment

Excerpt:
learned government pleader for civil supplies has since secured necessary instructions from the revenue divisional officer, jagital on 06.02.2012, a copy of which has been placed before me. 52, consumer affairs and civil supplies (cs.i) department, dated 18.12.2008. it is contended that the revenue divisional officer has issued a number of notifications on 26.12.2011 proposing to appoint fair price shop dealers, on a regular basis, against various vacancies, which are available in the revenue division. the revenue divisional officer is also not adopting the instructions passed on by the state government through their g.o.ms.no. 52, dated 18.12.2008 in the matter of application of principles of reservation in favour of the scheduled castes, scheduled tribes and backward classes. 4, dated 19.02.2011 or its implementation by the revenue divisional officer to the impugned set of notifications dated 26.12.2011, it will not be proper to hold that the action of the revenue divisional officer in issuing the said notifications, in any manner, is illegal.nooty ramamohana rao, j.order:1. learned government pleader for civil supplies has since secured necessary instructions from the revenue divisional officer, jagital on 06.02.2012, a copy of which has been placed before me. this writ petition is instituted seeking a writ of mandamus for cancelling the notification issued by the revenue divisional officer, jagital for filling up, on a regular basis, dealers for fair price shops no. 1909, 1949, 1918, 1931, 1924, 1934 and 1923 and further direct the respondents to adhere to the selection procedure contemplated by the andhra pradesh state public distribution system (control) order, 2008 (for short, 'the 2008 order') read with the decision of the state government contained in their g.o.ms.no. 52, consumer affairs and civil supplies (cs.i) department, dated 18.12.2008. the case of the petitioners is that the revenue divisional officer, jagital has not been adhering to the procedure of selection contemplated by the 2008 order and the policy decisions taken by the state government in the matter of application of principles of reservation in favour of the scheduled castes, scheduled tribes and backward classes effectively. hence, the present writ petition has been instituted. it is contended that the revenue divisional officer has issued a number of notifications on 26.12.2011 proposing to appoint fair price shop dealers, on a regular basis, against various vacancies, which are available in the revenue division. the revenue divisional officer is also not adopting the instructions passed on by the state government through their g.o.ms.no. 52, dated 18.12.2008 in the matter of application of principles of reservation in favour of the scheduled castes, scheduled tribes and backward classes. per contra, the learned government pleader, based upon the instructions received by him from the revenue divisional officer, jagital, would contend that the 2008 order has provided for the detailed procedure for selection and appointment of dealers on regular basis in clause 5 of the said order and the state government has reviewed the performance and application of the aforementioned order in the matter of selection of fair price shop dealers and consequently, issued revised policy guidelines through their order contained in g.o.ms.no. 4, consumer affairs, food and civil supplies department, dated 19.02.2011 and therefore, the guidelines contained in these latest orders namely g.o.ms.no. 4, dated 19.02.2011 are faithfully and scrupulously followed. in paragraph 7 of the latest guidelines, reservation has been provided for scheduled castes, scheduled tribes, physically challenged categories and backward classes in the proportion 15%, 6%, 3% and 25% respectively and apart from this, across all the segments, 30% of the fair price shops are sought to be filled in by appointing women dealers and for the purpose of effective implementation of the scheme of reservation, entire revenue division/circle is taken as the unit and the preferences and priorities to be adopted in the matter of selection of dealers has been listed out in paragraph 9 of the said guidelines and strictly in accordance with these guidelines only, the revenue divisional officer has reserved the various shops amongst the various social segments. the revenue divisional officer, the appointing authority has been following a cyclic rotational order of 100 vacancies and as against each such slot, the appropriate reservation scheme is chosen, such as scheduled castes, scheduled tribes, backward classes, etcetera.2. in the absence of any concrete material to demonstrate the principles formulated by the state government in their policy decision contained in g.o.ms.no. 4, dated 19.02.2011 or its implementation by the revenue divisional officer to the impugned set of notifications dated 26.12.2011, it will not be proper to hold that the action of the revenue divisional officer in issuing the said notifications, in any manner, is illegal. i therefore, do not have any hesitation to dismiss this case, as there is no merit in the contentions canvassed and accordingly, the writ petition is dismissed. no costs.3. the instructions received by the learned government pleader for civil supplies from the revenue divisional officer, jagital, a copy of which has been placed before me, is taken on record.