The High Court held the writ petition lacked merit as the impugned appellate order remanding the license cancellation case afresh caused no prejudice to the petitioner, who was thus not an aggrieved person.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
Court No. - 46
Case :- WRIT - C No. - 14294 of 2019
Petitioner :- Bhuleram Khatana Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 3 Others Counsel for Petitioner :- Devendra Singh,Atul Kumar Srivastava
Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.,Mahesh Narain Singh
Hon'ble Saral Srivastava,J.
Heard Sri Atul Kumar Srivastava, learned counsel for the petitioner and Sri P.K. Chauhan, learned Standing Counsel.
The petitioner is a fair price shop agent of Village Hasanpur Kalan, Block Machhra, Tehsil Mawana, District Meerut.
The license of the petitioner was cancelled by the respondent no. 3 The Sub-Divisional Officer, Mawana Tehsil Mawana, District Meerut by order dated 21.8.2018.
Against the said order, the petitioner preferred statutory appeal no. 01460/2018 (Computerized Case No. C201811000001460) before Joint Commissioner (Food), Meerut Division, Meerut, which was partly allowed by the Joint Commissioner by order dated 18.2.2019 and directed the licensing authority to decide the matter afresh in the light of the observations made in the order. The said order is impugned in the present petition.
The appellate authority has partly allowed the appeal of the petitioner and remanded the matter back. Thus, the order impugned has not caused any prejudice to the petitioner and further, the petitioner cannot said to be an aggrieved person in the facts of the present case.
Thus, the writ petition lacks merit and is accordingly, dismissed.
Order Date :- 25.4.2019 Ishan
1 issue framed by the court
Whether the petitioner qualifies as an aggrieved person after the appellate authority remanded the matter afresh.
Bhuleram Khatana
State Of U.P.
Other Respondent 1
Other Respondent 2
Other Respondent 3
Saral Srivastava
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
