Telangana High Court
WP/26997/2005 of Smt. S. Rajya Laxmi Vs The District Collector, on 27 December 2005
SRI JUSTICE V.ESWARAIAH W.P.NO.26997 OF 2005 Dt.27.12.2005 Between: S.Rajyalaxmi … Petitioner And The District Collector, Krishna at Machilipatnam and 3 others … Respondents ORDER: The petitioner seeks to issue writ of mandamus declaring the order issued by the first
THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE V.ESWARAIAH
W.P.NO.26997 OF 2005Dt.27.12.2005Between:S.Rajyalaxmi… PetitionerAndThe District Collector, Krishna atMachilipatnam and 3 others … Respondents
Citations and Judicial Treatment
Cited by
0
Decisions in the index citing it
Cites
0
Decisions referred to
In this index
0
Of the decisions it cites
Overruled / Questioned
0
No negative treatment found
Loading the citing and cited decisions…
This judgment in the centre: on the left the decisions it cites, on the right the decisions citing it. Colour is the treatment; choose a decision to open it.
ORDER:
The petitioner seeks to issue writ of mandamus declaring the orderissued by the first respondent in Rc.No.B1/RP/09/2005 dated30.11.2005 confirming the orders issued by respondent Nos.2 and 3dated 12.9.2005 and 29.10.2004 respectively as illegal and arbitraryand consequently direct the respondents to continue the petitioner asfair price shop dealer.
Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner as well as the learnedGovernment Pleader for Civil Supplies on behalf of the respondents.
The petitioner was appointed as fair price shop dealer of Ward No.8,Tiruvuru Village and Mandal of Krishna District. Basing on the reportof the Mandal Revenue Officer, Tiruvuru, the 3[rd] respondent initiateddisciplinary proceedings and cancelled the authorization of thepetitioner by order dated 29.10.2004 on the ground that the petitioner is not residing in the said village and her brother is running the saidshop as a benami. It is stated that subsequent to the marriage of thepetitioner in the year 1997, she shifted her residence from Tiruvuru toSiripuram Village, Madhira Mandal, Khammam District. It is stated thatSiripuram is the border place of Tiruvuru and her brother being thefamily member is only assisting her and it cannot be said that there isviolation of any of the conditions of the authorization. As against thesaid order of cancellation, the petitioner filed an appeal before theJoint Collector, Krishna and the appellate authority by order dated12.9.2005 held that as per the order of the Government in G.O.Ms.No.53, Consumer Affairs, Food and Civil Supplies (CS-I) Department,dated 6.10.2003 the dealer shall personally run the shop and not runit benami or through an agent. However, women dealers may takethe assistance of their family members whose names are included inthe dealer’s supply card and if a woman dealer gets married and inthe event of her leaving the village, she must relinquish thedealership.
In the instant case, it is the finding of the appointing authoritythat the petitioner left the village after her marriage and her brother isonly running the shop. Therefore, she must relinquish the dealershipand she cannot continue the dealership. As against the said order ofthe Joint Collector dated 12.9.2005, the petitioner also filed revisionbefore the Collector and the revisional authority also following thesaid Government Order dismissed the revision by order dated30.11.2005. Questioning the said action of the first respondent, thiswrit petition has been filed.
Having regard to the facts and circumstances of the case that as theappointing authority, appellate authority and the revisional authorityconcurrently held that the petitioner is not residing in Tiruvuru villageand after her marriage she is residing in Siripuram village andtherefore she shall relinquish her dealership and she cannot continueto hold the dealership of the said village and as the dealership cannotbe run through benami or through agent, I do not see any merit in thiswrit petition.
The writ petition is accordingly dismissed. No costs.
_________________
(V.ESWARAIAH, J.)
27.12.2005
kpr