1 APHC010038262025 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) [3332] WEDNESDAY,THE EIGHTEENTH DAY OF FEBRUARY TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY SIX PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE RAVI CHEEMALAPATI WRIT PETITION NO: 2152/2025 Between: Dadireddy Sindhu ...PETITIONER AND The State Of Ap and Others ...RESPONDENT(S) Counsel for the Petitioner: 1. P NARASIMHULU Counsel for the Respondent(S): 1. RAMESH BABU TATAPUDI 2. GP FOR CIVIL SUPPLIES The Court made the following order: Impugning the action of the 4th respondent in selecting the 7th respondent as fair price shop dealer to the shop No.1140007 situated at Nallathimmayapalle village, Nandhaluru Mandal, Annamaiah District contrary to the notification vide Ref.No.C-2/1779/2024 dated 07.12.2024, the present writ petition is filed. 2 2. Heard Sri Narasimhulu Parise, learned counsel for the petitioner (appeared in virtual mode), Sri Ramesh Babu Talluri, learned counsel for the 7th respondent and Sri Appasani Vineeth, learned Assistant Government Pleader for Civil Supplies. 3. Learned counsel for the petitioner in elaboration to what has been stated in the affidavit contended that, 4th respondent-Sub Collector issued a notification dated 07.12.2024 inviting applications for filing up of vacancies for fair price shops wherein the subject shop was notified for OC(W) category with a precondition that the applicant should be a native of the respective village/ward. He further submitted that, instead of selecting the petitioner, who is a native of Nallathimmayapalle village, the 4th respondent has selected the 7th respondent as fair price shop dealer to the subject fair price shop, though she is not a native of the subject village and belongs to SC category, contrary to the said notification. If the said selection is validated, the rights of the petitioner would be affected, as such prayed to pass appropriate orders protecting the interest of the petitioner. 4. Learned Assistant Government Pleader for Civil Supplies while placing reliance on the aadhar card of the 7th respondent filed along with memo, contended that, the 7th respondent is the native of the subject village (Nallathimmayapalle). He further submitted that, since the post notified for the subject village is of Open Category(OC), anybody can contest in the said category including the candidates, who belongs to reservation category. He 3 further submitted that, there is neither illegality nor procedural irregularity in selecting the 7th respondent as fair price shop dealer to the subject shop in the subject village. As such, the petitioner has not made any points warranting the interference of this Court and writ petition deserves dismissal being meritless. 5. Learned counsel for the 7th respondent submitted that, since the 7th respondent is a native of the subject village, she is eligible for the said post and accordingly, the authorities have rightly selected her as a fair price shop dealer to the subject shop in the subject village. 6. Perused the record and considered the submissions of the respective learned counsel. 7. A perusal of the a adhar card filed by the learned Assistant Government Pleader for civil supplies, along with memo clearly shows that, the 7th respondent is a resident of Nallathimmayapalle village, which is subject village in the present writ petition. As rightly contended by the learned Assistant Government Pleader, anyone can contest in the open category. The Open Category is fundamentally merit-based and acts as a common pool accessible to all candidates, Any citizen of India who is a registered voter in that constituency and meets the age (usually 21+ for local bodies) and other eligibility criteria can contest, regardless of whether they belong to the General, SC, ST, or OBC category. 4 10. In view of the said facts, since the 7th respondent is native of the subject village and she is eligible to contest in the open category, the authorities have rightly selected the 7th respondent and the same does not suffer from any procedural infirmity. The petitioner has not raised any valid grounds warranting the interference of this court. As such the writ petition is devoid of merits and liable to be dismissed. Accordingly, the writ petition is dismissed. No costs. Miscellaneous applications, pending if any, shall stand closed. ___________________________ JUSTICE RAVI CHEEMALAPATI BRS