APHC010401232024 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH WEDNESDAY,THE FOURTH DAY OF FEBRUARY TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY SIX THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE RAVI CHEEMALAPATI WRIT PETITION NO: Between: 1. SAMBANGI AMRESWARAI, W/O. LATE SAMBANGI SRINIVASA RAO AGED ABOUT 39 YEARS, R/O. 3 KRISHNA DISTRICT. 1. THE STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH, REP. BY ITS PRINCIPAL SECRETARY, DEPARTMENT OF VELAGAPUDI, KRISHNA DISTRICT. 2. THE DISTRICT COLLECTOR, (CS) MACHILIPATNAM, KRISHNA DISTRICT. 3. THE REVENUE DIVISIONAL OFFICER, GUDIVADA, KRISHNA DISTRICT. 4. THE THASILDAR, UNGUTURU, KRISHNA DISTRICT, ANDHRA PRADESH Petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed therewith, the High Court may be 1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) WEDNESDAY,THE FOURTH DAY OF FEBRUARY TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY SIX PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE RAVI CHEEMALAPATI WRIT PETITION NO: 20905/2024 SAMBANGI AMRESWARAI, W/O. LATE SAMBANGI SRINIVASA RAO AGED ABOUT 39 YEARS, R/O. 3-53, VELAMPETA, UNGUTURU, KRISHNA DISTRICT. ...PETITIONER AND THE STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH, REP. BY ITS PRINCIPAL SECRETARY, DEPARTMENT OF CIVIL SUPPLIES SECRETARIAT, VELAGAPUDI, KRISHNA DISTRICT. THE DISTRICT COLLECTOR, (CS) MACHILIPATNAM, KRISHNA THE REVENUE DIVISIONAL OFFICER, GUDIVADA, KRISHNA THE THASILDAR, UNGUTURU, KRISHNA DISTRICT, ANDHRA ...RESPONDENT(S): Petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed therewith, the High Court may be RC,J W.P.No.20905 of 2024 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH [3332] WEDNESDAY,THE FOURTH DAY OF FEBRUARY THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE RAVI CHEEMALAPATI SAMBANGI AMRESWARAI, W/O. LATE SAMBANGI SRINIVASA RAO 53, VELAMPETA, UNGUTURU, ...PETITIONER THE STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH, REP. BY ITS PRINCIPAL CIVIL SUPPLIES SECRETARIAT, THE DISTRICT COLLECTOR, (CS) MACHILIPATNAM, KRISHNA THE REVENUE DIVISIONAL OFFICER, GUDIVADA, KRISHNA THE THASILDAR, UNGUTURU, KRISHNA DISTRICT, ANDHRA ...RESPONDENT(S): Petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed therewith, the High Court may be RC,J W.P.No.20905 of 2024 2 pleased to issue a Writ, Order or direction more particularly one in the nature of WRIT OF MANDAMUS declaring the grievance redressal response of the 3RD respondent dated 12/8/2024 rejecting the application of the petitioner dated 12/08/2024 for the purpose of appointment of FP Shop dealership of Unguturu village, Unguturu Mandal, Krishna District on compassionate appointment as per GO Ms No 4 dated 28/2/2014 is illegal, arbitrary and violation of principles of natural justice and consequently set aside the same and pass IA NO: 1 OF 2024 Petition under Section 151 CPC praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed in support of the petition, the High Court may be pleased to direct the Respondents to allow me to continue as F.P. Shop dealer in Unguturu village, Unguturu Mandal, Krishna District, pending disposal of the above writ petition, in the interest of justice and pass IA NO: 1 OF 2025 Petition under Section 151 CPC praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed in support of the petition, the High Court may be pleased to vacate the Interim Order dated 23.09.2024 passed in I. A. No. 1 of 2024 in W.P.No.20905 of 2024 and dismiss the Writ Petition Counsel for the Petitioner: 1. K V ADITYA CHOWDARY Counsel for the Respondent(S): 1. GP FOR CIVIL SUPPLIES The Court made the following: RC,J W.P.No.20905 of 2024 3 ORDER The grievance of the petitioner is that her application submitted in grievance redressal cell for appointing her as a dealer on compassionate grounds in the place of her deceased husband, who was F.P.shop dealer, was rejected by respondent no.3-The Revenue Divisional Officer, Gudivada, vide grievance redressal response dated 21.08.2024. 2. The case of the petitioner, in brief is that her husband was authorized Fair Price Shop dealer of Unguturu Village and Mandal and while the said authorization was in force he passed away on 02.07.2024 and thereafter the petitioner managed the F.P.shop, which is the only source of income of her family, for two months. That the petitioner, being the legal heir of the deceased F.P.shop dealer, submitted an application requesting the authorities to appoint her as F.P.shop dealer on compassionate grounds, in accordance with G.O.Ms.No.4, Consumer Affairs, Food and Civil Supplies (CS- I) Department, dated 28.02.2014. That as per the Public Grievance Redressal System status, the said representation was closed as per grievance redressal response dated 21.08.2024 with the statement as if the petitioner does not possess prescribed educational qualification. That G.O.Ms.No.4, dated 28.02.2014 specifies that the legal heirs, whowere not having prescribed educational qualifications, shall be given three (03) years time from the date RC,J W.P.No.20905 of 2024 4 of appointment for possession the prescribed educational qualifications. That rejection of the petitioner’s representation for appointment on compassionate grounds is illegal, arbitrary and against the terms of the G.O.Ms.No.4, dated 28.02.2014. Hence, the writ petition. 3. Heard Ms. Aarthi, learned counsel, representing Sri K.V.Aditya Chowdary, learned counsel for the petitioner, and Sri Vineeth Appasani, learned Assistant Government Pleader for Civil Supplies. 4. Ms.Aarthi, learned counsel for the petitioner, while reiterating the contents of the writ affidavit would contend that though G.O.Ms.No.4, dated 28.02.2014 specifically states that three years time shall be given for possessing the prescribed educational qualifications, rejection of the petitioner’s representation on the ground that the petitioner did not possess prescribed educational qualification is contrary to the terms of the said G.O. Accordingly, prayed to set aside the rejection order and direct the authorities to appoint the petitioner as dealer of the subject F.P.shop on compassionate grounds. 5. 5. On the other hand, Sri Vineeth Appasani, learned Assistant Government Pleader, on counter, would contend that the petitioner instead of submitting application to the appointing authority-Revenue Divisional Officer, RC,J W.P.No.20905 of 2024 5 filed the application in Public Grievance Redressal System and when she approached the authorities she was informed of the mistake committed by her and assured her that if she makes any application to the appropriate authority, necessary action will be taken, however, the petitioner instead of submitting application to the Revenue Divisional Officer, filed this writ petition. The writ petition lacks merit and the same deserves dismissal. Accordingly, prayed to dismiss the writ petition. 6. It is not in dispute that petitioner’s husband was dealer of F.P.shop and he died while his authorization was in force. As per G.O.Ms.No.4, dated 28.02.2014, legal heirs of the deceased Fair Price Shop Dealer, can be appointed as Fair Price Shop Dealer on compassionate grounds. Admittedly, the petitioner did not submit the representation to the appointing authority- Revenue Divisional Officer, rather she filed the same in Public Grievance Redressal System. If any person approaches any wrong forum with any representation, the said Forum shall either forward the said representation to the appropriate authority or suggest the person the appropriate authority before whom the said representation has to be filed. It is fairly settled that the authority which has no authority or jurisdiction to decide a representation cannot reject the same. Therefore, the contention of the learned Assistant RC,J W.P.No.20905 of 2024 6 Government Pleader that since the petitioner did not submit the representation to the appointing authority, her request need not be considered and hence rejection of her representation by Public Grievance Response is justified, is untenable and unsustainable. 7. The learned Assistant Government Pleader brought to the notice of this Court that no fresh notification has been issued in respect of the subject F.P.shop and the petitioner has been continuing as dealer of the subject F.P.Shop. 7. The material would indicate that the petitioner made representation within time, but in the Public Grievance Redressal System, instead to the appointing authority. Therefore, to meet the ends of justice, this writ petition can be disposed of in the following terms: (a) the petitioner shall file an application before the concerned Revenue Divisional Officer with a request to appoint her as F.P.shop dealer on compassionate grounds within a period of two (02) weeks from the date of receipt of copy of this order. (b) upon receipt of such application, the concerned Revenue Divisional Officer shall consider and dispose of the same in terms of G.O.Ms.No.4, dated 28.02.2014, within a period of four(04) weeks thereafter, after providing an opportunity of being heard. RC,J W.P.No.20905 of 2024 7 (c) till consideration of application, the authorities shall continue the petitioner as dealer of the subject F.P.Shop. 8. Accordingly, the writ petition is disposed of. There shall be no order as to costs. Pending miscellaneous petitions, if any, shall stand closed. __________________________ JUSTICE RAVI CHEEMALAPATI 4th February, 2026. RR