APHC010189512025 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI [3332]

(Special Original Jurisdiction)

TUESDAY, THE TWENTY SEVENTH DAY OF JANUARY TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY SIX PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE RAVI CHEEMALAPATI WRIT PETITION NO: 9902/2025 Between:

Golagani Raja Rao ...PETITIONER AND The State Of Andhra Pradesh and Others ...RESPONDENT(S)

Counsel for the Petitioner:

1. M M M SRINIVASA RAO Counsel for the Respondent(S):

1. GP FOR CIVIL SUPPLIES The Court made the following order:

Impugning the endorsement issued by the 3^rd respondent dated

11.03.2025 rejecting the appointment of the petitioner as Fair Price shop dealer on compassionate grounds, the present writ petition is filed.

2. Heard Sri M.M.M.Srinivasa Rao, learned counsel for the petitioner and Sri Vineeth Appasani, 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, originally the petitioner’s father was appointed as fair price shop dealer for the Shop No.0320043 situated in Mallam village, Butchayyapeta Mandal, Anakapalli district and he died on 17.12.2021. He further submitted that, by virtue of G.O.Ms.No.33 dated 19.12.2018 wherein the upper age limit was enhanced to 50 years, the petitioner has made a representation dated 05.12.2024 seeking appointment on compassionate grounds and the 3^rd respondent (Revenue Divisional Officer) has rejected his request on the grounds that a crime was registered against the petitioner and also he has crossed the age limit as per G.O.Ms.No.33 dated 19.12.2018.

He further submitted that, as per guidelines envisaged in G.O.Ms.No.4 dated 28.02.2014, the compassionate appointment shall also applicable to the persons who were within the age limit as on the date of the demise of the Fair Price Shop Dealer. He further submitted that, the age of petitioner as on the demise of his father is 49 years, which is within the prescribed limit as per G.O.Ms.No.33 dated 19.12.2018 and insofar as crime, mere registration of a case should not come in the way of considering the petitioner case. As such, the impugned proceedings are liable to be set aside and accordingly prayed to set aside the impugned proceedings.

4. On the other hand, while justifying the orders impugned, learned Assistant Government Pleader submitted that, the guideline no.6(viii) of the G.O.Ms.No.4 dated 28.02.2014 stipulates that while appointing the wife/son/daughter on compassionate grounds as Fair price shop dealer, it shall be ensured that he/she shall have clean record without having any criminal cases. He further submitted that, admittedly, a crime vide Cr.No.167/2019 was registered against the petitioner which is pending consideration, as such, the authorities have rightly rejected the petitioner’s case and issued impugned proceedings. As such the writ petition is devoid of merits and liable to be dismissed and accordingly prayed to dismiss the writ petition.

5. Perused the record and considered the submissions of both the learned counsel.

6. A perusal of the impugned proceedings would indicate that the Revenue Divisional Officer has rejected the petitioner application for appointment of fair price shop dealer on compassionate grounds based on two grounds, that a case was registered against the petitioner vide Cr.No.167/2019 which is pending consideration and that the petitioner has crossed that age limit as per G.O.Ms.33 dated 19.12.2018.

7. The guideline No.6(iv) of the G.O.Ms.No.4 dated 28.02.2014 reads as follows:

“6..(iv)The compassionate appointment shall also applicable to the persons who were within the age limit as on the date of the demise of the Fair Price Shop Dealer.”

8. The said G.O. has got amended vide G.O.Ms.33 Consumer Affairs, Food & Civil Supplies (CS.I) Department dated 19.12.2018 wherein it was envisaged that compassionate appointment for FP Shop dealership shall be applicable to the persons who have completed 18 years of age and not have c