The High Court dismisses a writ petition challenging the cancellation of the petitioner's FPS dealership licence, holding that the petitioner is not entitled to relief due to an unexplained delay of eight years between the impugned order being passed and the filing of this petition.
The writ petition is summarily dismissed without admission.
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.
Form J(2) IN THE HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA CONSTITUTIONAL WRIT JURISDICTION Appellate Side
Present : The Hon’ble Justice Bibek Chaudhuri
WPA 8421 of 2023
Md. Javed Sarwar Vs.
The State of West Bengal & Ors.
Mr. Sankar Paul Mr. Imtiaz Ahmed
Ms. Tapati Sankar
..for the petitioner
Item No.11
Heard & Judgment on: 12.06.2023
Bibek Chaudhuri, J.
Affidavit of service be kept with the record.
By an order dated 13th September, 2011 in W.P. 18735 (W) of
2011 a Co-ordinate Bench of this Court quashed an order passed by the District Controller, Food & Supplies, Murshidabad confirming the order of Sub-Divisional Controller terminating MR Dealership licence of the petitioner and directed the respondents to reconsider the representation/showcause filed by the petitioner after giving
2
opportunity of fresh hearing given to him and also directed the respondent/Appellate Authority to pass reasoned order within a period of eight weeks.
In compliance of the order of this Court in W.P. 18735 (W) of 2011 on 5th January, 2012 the District Controller and E.O., Assistant Director, Food & Supplies, Murshidabad passed a reasoned order giving opportunity to the petitioner of hearing. The District Controller came to the conclusion that FPS Dealer/petitioner violated the provisions of WPPDS (M & C) order, 2003. Accordingly, his licence was cancelled. The petitioner has approached this Court after a lapse of more than nine years stating, inter alia, that the above mentioned impugned order was communicated to him on 11th December, 2020.
It is needless to say that when FPS licence of a petitioner is cancelled, he is the worst sufferer and when he was able to demonstrate his luxury to wait for eight years for having the impugned order and subsequently come up with the instant writ petition challenging an order dated 4th April, 2012 in the year 2021, the petitioner is not entitled to get any relief under the facts and circumstances of this case.
Moreover, on perusal of the impugned order, I find that the respondent authority has duly complied with the order passed by this Court in W.P. 18735 (W) of 2011. Accordingly, I do not find any
3
reason to admit the instant writ petition and the same is summarily
dismissed.
(Bibek Chaudhuri, J.)
1 issue framed by the court
Whether the instant writ petition challenging the termination of the FPS dealership licence should be admitted given the significant delay in filing.
Md. Javed Sarwar
The State of West Bengal
Bibek Chaudhuri
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
