Allowed

Badarunnisha v. State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Food and Civil Supplies,U.P. Govt. Lko. and 2 Others

Allahabad HC1 Aug 2024/1782/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court held that obtaining District Magistrate approval is mandatory before cancelling a fair price shop license. It set aside arbitrary orders made in violation of a Government Order dated 05.08.2019 regarding this procedure and remanded the matter for fresh orders.

What did the court decide?

Impugned orders dated 30.12.2020 and 24.02.2022 set aside; matter remanded to the Prescribed Authority/Sub Divisional Magistrate for fresh orders.

Badarunnisha Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Food and Civil Supplies,U.P. Govt. Lko. and 2 Others — Allahabad HC (2024) — LawSathi Research

¶1

Neutral Citation No. - 2024:AHC-LKO:52761

¶2

Court No. - 7

¶3

Case :- WRIT - C No. - 1782 of 2022

¶4

Petitioner :- Badarunnisha

¶5

Respondent :- State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Food And Civil Supplies,U.P. Govt. Lko. And 2 Others Counsel for Petitioner :- Rakesh Kumar Srivastava,Praveen Kumar Sharma

¶6

Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.,Anoop Vajpayee

¶7

Hon'ble Alok Mathur,J.

¶8

Heard Sri Rakesh Kumar Srivastava, learned counsel for the petitioner as well as learned Standing Counsel for respondent nos. 1, 2 and 3 and Shri Anoop Vajpayee, learned counsel appearing for respondent no. 4.

¶9

With the consent of learned counsel for the parties this Court proceeds to decide the case finally.

¶10

By means of present writ petition the petition has challenged the order dated 24.02.2022, passed by the Joint Commissioner (Food), Lucknow Division, Lucknow thereby rejecting the appeal preferred by the petitioner against order dated 30.12.2020, passed by the Prescribed Authority/Sub Divisional Magistrate, Tehsil - Sandila, District - Hardoi, cancelling fair price shop license of the petitioner.

¶11

Facts in brief of the present case are that the petitioner was fair price shop licensee at Village Panchayat - Bhatauli (Nandauli), Block - Behander, Tehsil - Sandila, District - Hardoi and runs fair price shop in the said village panchayat for several years. It has been stated that there was no compliant against the working of the petitioner till 2018. In 2018, it has been submitted that certain complaints were made against petitioner by the villagers alleging that they were given less quantity of food grains and kerosene oil and that petitioner is charging higher price for the commodities sold from his fair price shop. An inspection was carried out by the concerned Supply Inspector and accordingly a report was submitted on 13.02.2018. The petitioner was also asked to submit is response to the allegations levelled against him and finding the said explanation to be unsatisfactory, the Prescribed Authority/Sub Divisional Magistrate cancelled the fair price shop license of petitioner by means of order dated 24.01.2019. Aggrieved by the order of cancellation petitioner preferred an appeal before

¶12

the Joint Commissioner (Food), Lucknow Division, Lucknow. In the said appeal it was submitted that all the relevant documents including the report and other material which were relied upon by the Prescribed Authority while passing the order of cancellation were never supplied to the petitioner and consequently he has been deprived of an opportunity of rebutting the allegations levelled against him and therefore the cancellation order is patently illegal having been passed in gross violation of principles of natural justice.

¶13

The Appellate Authority finding the allegations levelled by the petitioner while assailing the order of cancellation to be correct, by means of order dated 05.12.2019, allowed the appeal and remitted the matter back to the Prescribed Authority for passing fresh order after giving material and evidence against petitioner and also giving fair opportunity of hearing.

¶14

In the remand proceedings, the Prescribed Authority/Sub Divisional Magistrate after providing the petitioner all the documents and giving an opportunity of hearing again passed the order of cancellation dated 30.12.2020. The petitioner being aggrieved by order of cancellation dated 30.12.2020, again preferred an appeal before the Appellate Authority. Amongst other grounds the petitioner has specifically raised the ground that it was mandatory for the Prescribed Authority/Sub Divisional Magistrate to take approval of District Magistrate before passing the order of cancellation. He submits that as per Government Order dated 05.08.2019, in para 2 of the said Government Order detail procedure has been provided for the competent authority for proceeding in the matter of cancellation of fair price shop license. It is provided that prior to cancelling a fair price shop licence prior approval the District Magistrate should be obtained.

¶15

This ground was raised by the petitioner before the Appellate Authority and though he had recorded the same in the impugned order dated 24.02.2022, but has not considered this ground thereafter, and proceeded to reject the appeal of the petitioner on merits.

¶16

Learned counsel for the petitioner while assailing both the orders i.e. order of cancellation dated 30.12.2020 and order of Appellate Authority dated 24.02.2022, has confined his arguments only to the aspect of not obtaining prior approval from the District Magistrate, which would prove to be fatal to the order of cancellation.

¶17

Learned Standing Counsel was granted time to seek instructions in this regard. He has submitted that in the present

¶18

case approval was obtained prior to cancellation of fair price shop license of the petitioner on 24.01.2019, but fairly submits that on the subsequent occasion in the remand proceedings before passing of order dated 30.12.2020, no prior approval of the District Magistrate was obtained.

¶19

Heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the record.

¶20

From the facts discussed above, this Court is of the considered view that obtaining approval of the District Magistrate is mandatory condition which should have been followed by the Prescribed Authority/Sub Divisional Magistrate prior to passing the order of cancellation. On the previous occasion prior approval of District Magistrate was obtained by the Prescribed Authority while passing the order of cancellation dated 24.01.2019. But undoubtedly order dated 24.01.2019 was set aside by the Appellate Authority itself on 05.12.2019 and thereafter fresh proceedings were conducted after giving due opportunity of hearing to the petitioner.

¶21

It is in the remand proceedings that the Prescribed Authority has again found that the charges against the petitioner stood proved and therefore his order of cancellation should have been preceded by obtaining prior approval from the District Magistrate. Accordingly, there is infirmity in the cancellation order dated 30.12.2020 as well as appellate order dated 24.02.2022.

¶22

Accordingly, impugned orders dated 30.12.2020 and 24.02.2022 are arbitrary and illegal having nor followed the procedure prescribed in the Government Order dated 05.08.2019 and are set aside. The matter is remanded to the Prescribed Authority/Sub Divisional Magistrate for passing fresh orders in accordance with law.

¶23

In the light of above, the writ petition stands allowed .

¶24

Order Date :- 1.8.2024 KR

¶25

(Alok Mathur,J.)

¶26

Digitally signed by :- RABINDRA KUMAR High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench

Badarunnisha v. State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Food and Civil Supplies,U.P. Govt. Lko. and 2 Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Badarunnisha v. State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Food and Civil Supplies,U.P. Govt. Lko. and 2 Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Haribansh Chaubey and 6 Others Vs Regional Provident Fund Commissioner Provident Fund Office Lko. and Another

Ram Shabd Vs Sub Divisional Magistrate , Jaisinghpur , Sultanpur and Others

Abid Ali Vs Civil Judge (Jr.Div) Lalganj Pratapgarh and 3 Others

M/S Sardar Motors Civil Lines Faizabad Throu Its Partner Vs Commissioner of Commercial Tax U.P.Lucknow

Anil Kumar Bajpai Vs Presiding Officer, Labour Court, Lko. and Others

Rajaram and Another Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Deptt. of Finance Lko. and Others