Disposed

Vikram Datt Sharma v. State of U P and Another

Allahabad HC8 Dec 2020WRIC/21498/2020

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This Court dismissed the objection to maintainability in a writ petition concerning the suspension of a fair price shop licence. With party consent, the Court disposed of the matter, directing the Authority to pass a final order within three weeks after considering the petitioner's reply.

What did the court decide?

Directed the second respondent to pass a final order within three weeks considering the petitioner's reply/objection.

Vikram Datt Sharma Vs State of U P and Another — Service and Employment | Allahabad HC (2020)

¶1

Court No. - 71

¶2

Case :- WRIT - C No. - 21498 of 2020

¶3

Petitioner :- Vikram Datt Sharma Respondent :- State Of U P And Another Counsel for Petitioner :- Jai Singh Yadav Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.

¶4

Hon'ble Mahesh Chandra Tripathi,J.

¶5

Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and Sri Devesh Vikram, learned Standing Counsel for the State-respondent.

¶6

Petitioner is before this Court assailing the order impugned dated 8.9.2020 passed by the second respondent whereby licence of the fair price shop of the petitioner has been suspended. With a further prayer to issue a mandamus commanding the second respondent to pass a final order after considering the petitioner's reply.

¶7

At the very outset, learned Standing Counsel raised an objection regarding maintainability of the writ petition on the ground that final decision is yet to taken in the matter by the Authority.

¶8

Confronted with the situation, learned counsel for the petitioner states that in response to the order impugned, the petitioner has already filed his detailed reply/objection before the second respondent and the same is pending consideration.

¶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 asking the second respondent to take a final call in the matter strictly, in accordance with law as expeditiously as possible and preferably within three weeks time from the date of production of a copy of this order before him taking into account the reply/objection so filed by the petitioner.

¶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 :- 8.12.2020 A.K.Srivastava

Vikram Datt Sharma v. State of U P and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Vikram Datt Sharma v. State of U P and Another

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

Rakesh Kumar Upadhyay Vs Mandir Hanumanji Maharaj Sarajanik Nyas Virajman and 2 Others

Kamlawati Vs State of U.P. and 5 Others

Mamta Devi Vs State of U.P. and Another

Arun Kumar Vs Shafiq Ahmad and 7 Others

Hirawati Vs State of U.P. and 4 Others

Nand Kishor Vs State of U.P. and 2 Others