Disposed

Sheraz Ahmad v. State of U P and 4 Others

Allahabad HC24 Aug 2018WRIC/28596/2018

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This court disposed of a writ petition seeking appointment as a fair price shop dealer. The petitioner's name was recommended by the village panchayat, but objections regarding category reservation arose. The court directed the petitioner to file a representation with the District Magistrate for a decision within three months instead of deciding the merits immediately.

What did the court decide?

Petitioner directed to file a representation with the District Magistrate, Basti, who must decide within three months.

Sheraz Ahmad Vs State of U P and 4 Others — Service and Employment | Allahabad HC (2018)

¶1

Court No. - 2 Case :- WRIT - C No. - 28596 of 2018 Petitioner :- Sheraz Ahmad Respondent :- State Of U P And 4 Others Counsel for Petitioner :- Satya Prakash Pandey Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.,Dharam Deo Chauhan

¶2

Hon'ble Ajay Bhanot,J.

¶3

The petitioner claims that his name was recommended for appointment as fair price shop dealer of village panchayat Hasnapur, District-Basti in an open meeting of the village panchayat held on 22.6.2018.

¶4

The submission of Sri S.P. Pandey, learned counsel for the petitioner is that the open meeting of the said village was held strictly in terms of the government order and the name of the petitioner was forwarded in accordance with law. Learned counsel for the petitioner pointed out that objection has been raised regarding the appointment of the petitioner on the ground that the shop was reserved for the category of dependents of freedom fighters. He further contends that there is no dependent of freedom fighter in the aforesaid village panchayat. He has relied on a certificate issued to this effect by the gram pradhan of the said village panchayat.

¶5

Learned Standing Counsel raised two fold objections. Firstly, he contends that these are issues of fact which need to be verified by the competent authority. Secondly, he submits that in the absence of an eligible candidate of a particular category in favour of which the fair price shop has been reserved, a procedure has been prescribed which has to be followed.

¶6

No useful purpose would be served by keeping the writ petition pending. With consent of the parties, the writ petition is being decided finally.

¶7

The petitioner shall make a representation to the respondent No.2, District Magistrate, Basti, highlighting his grievances and providing relevant documents in support of his claim for appointment as the fair price shop dealer. The District Magistrate, Basti shall decide the aforesaid representation in accordance with law and after consideration of the relevant government orders holding the field within a period of three months from the date of receipt of a certified copy of this order along with a copy of the representation.

¶8

With the aforesaid direction, the writ petition is disposed of finally.

¶9

Order Date :- 24.8.2018/Ashish Tripathi

Sheraz Ahmad v. State of U P and 4 Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Sheraz Ahmad v. State of U P and 4 Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Jyotsana Devi Vs Gautam Sen Gupta and 3 Others

Hridesh Kumar Pandey Vs State of U.P. Thru Secy. and Others

Chandra Jeet Yadav and Others Vs State of U.P. and Others

Srikrishna Vs State of U P and 2 Others

Smt. Pooja and Another Vs State of U.P. and 2 Others

Smt. Gulafsha Khatoon @ Lovely and Another Vs State of U P and 3 Others