A writ petition seeking a direction to consider representations becomes infructuous once the authorities have already passed an order or endorsement on those representations, leaving the petitioner the remedy to challenge said order in the appropriate forum.

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 pleased topleased to issue an appropriate writ, order or direction, more particularly one in the nature of Writ of Mandamus challenging the action of the Respondents in not considering the case of the petitioner for appointment to Fair Price Shop No.1241009 of MC Tanda Village, of Tanakallu Mandal by considering the representations dated 09.03.2026, 26.03.2026 and 28.03.2026 in terms of G.O.Ms.No.4, Consumer Affairs, Food And Civil Supplies (CS-1) Department, dated 28.02.2014 and further appointing 5TH Respondent vide proceedings R.C.No.l62/F/2026, dated 25.03.2026 arrangement, as arbitrary, illegal, violative of the principles of natural justice, contrary to contrary to G.O.Ms.No.4, dated 28.02.2014 the A.P. SPDS (Control) Order, 2018, violative of the Fundamental Rights guaranteed under Articles 14 and 19 of the Constitution of India and consequently direct the Respondents to continue the petitioner to the post of Dealer of Fair Price Shop No.1241009, of MC Tanda Village, of Tanakallu Mandal, Sri Satya Sai District, Andhra Pradesh and pass

IA NO: 1 OF 2026

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 leased to direct the Respondents to consider the representations 09.03.2026, 26.03.2026 and 28.03.2026 in terms of G.O.Ms.No.4, Consumer Affairs, Food And Civil Supplies (CS-1) Department, dated 28.02.2014 pending disposal of the above Writ Petition and pass

The Court made the following:

ORDER

The grievance of the petitioner is that the respondents are not considering the petitioner’s representations dated 09.03.2026, 26.03.2026 and 28.03.2026 seeking appointment as Fair Price Shop dealer of Shop No.1241009 of MC Tanda Village, Tanakallu Mandal on compassionate grounds.

2. Heard Srinivas Basava, learned counsel for the petitioner and Sri Vineeth Appasani, learned Assistant Government Pleader for Civil Supplies appearing for the respondents.

3. Learned counsel for the petitioner, in elaboration to what has been stated in the affidavit, submitted that the petitioner’s father was a permanent fair price shop dealer. Pursuant to his death, a series of representations were made seeking appointment of the petitioner on compassionate grounds in place of her father. Despite the representations, no action has been initiated. It would suffice for the time being if a direction is given to the respondents to consider and dispose of the petitioner’s representations in accordance with law.

4. On the other hand, learned Assistant Government Pleader submitted that on the petitioner’s representations, an endorsement was already issued and the same was placed on record by duly serving a copy across the Bench to the learned counsel for the petitioner. In view of the same, the writ petition has become infructuous. If the petitioner intends to question the same, she may approach the appropriate form.

5. Learned counsel for the petitioner sought permission of this Court to dispose of the writ petition by granting liberty to the petitioner to question the said endorsement.

6. Recording the said submission and as the authorities have already passed orders on the petitioner’s representations, nothing remains for adjudication in the writ petition.

7. Accordingly, the Writ Petition is disposed of giving liberty to the petitioner to approach the appropriate forum to question the endorsement dated 23.04.20