Disposed

Ramashankar v. State of U.P. and 2 Others

Allahabad HC10 Dec 2020WRIC/20588/2020

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Petitioner challenged the cancellation of his fair price shop licence via a writ petition. The Hon'ble Court held that since an efficacious alternative remedy was available, the writ petition was disposed of with directions to file a stay application in the appeal.

What did the court decide?

Writ petition disposed of; direction to file appeal with stay application within two weeks.

Ramashankar Vs State of U.P. and 2 Others — Service and Employment | Allahabad HC (2020)

¶1

Court No. - 71

¶2

Case :- WRIT - C No. - 20588 of 2020

¶3

Petitioner :- Ramashankar Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 2 Others Counsel for Petitioner :- Vijay Shanker Singh,Kamla Singh Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.

¶4

Hon'ble Mahesh Chandra Tripathi,J.

¶5

Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and Sri S.P.S.Rathore, learned Standing Counsel for the State-respondent.

¶6

By means of the present writ petition, petitioner is assailing the order impugned dated 5.9.2020 passed by the second respondent whereby licence of fair price shop of the petitioner has been cancelled.

¶7

Learned Standing Counsel raised an objection regarding maintainability of the writ petition on the ground that against the order impugned, the petitioner has got efficacious alternative remedy to file an appeal and as such the present writ petition is liable to be dismissed on the ground of statutory alternative remedy.

¶8

Once an objection is being raised, the Court has proceeded to examine the record and the Court is of the considered opinion once the efficacious alternative remedy is available to the petitioner, there is no reason or occasion to bypass the statutory forum and the writ petition is liable to be dismissed on the ground of statutory alternative remedy.

¶9

In the facts and circumstances, no useful purpose would be served in keeping the writ petition pending and with the consent of the parties, the writ petition is disposed of finally with the direction that in case any such appeal is being preferred by the petitioner along-with stay application within two weeks from today, the appellate authority would proceed to decide the stay application on its own merit within further six weeks time ignoring the delay and laches in filing the same but certainly after affording opportunity to all stakeholders in the matter.

¶10

The party shall file computer generated copy of such order downloaded from the official website of High Court Allahabad, self attested by the petitioner alongwith a self attested identity proof of the said person (preferably Aadhar Card) mentioning the mobile number to which the said Aadhar Card is linked.

¶11

The concerned Authority/Official shall verify the authenticity of such computerised copy of the order from the official website of High Court Allahabad and shall make a declaration of such verification in writing.

¶12

Order Date :- 10.12.2020 A.K.Srivastava

Ramashankar v. State of U.P. and 2 Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Ramashankar v. State of U.P. and 2 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

Chandrika Prasad Vs State of U.P. and 2 Others

Lalita Sharma Vs State of U.P. and 4 Others

M/S Shakumbari Sugar and Allied Industries Ltd. Vs Central Bank of India

Sukhveer Singh Vs State of U.P. and 2 Others

Pratap Chandra Verma Vs Rent Control and Eviction Officer and Another

Sunil Kumar Jaiswal Vs State of U.P. and 3 Others