Single judge dismissed a writ petition seeking renewal of fair price shop authorisation. The court upheld the respondent's claim that applications filed after licence expiry were invalid due to lack of evidence substantiating earlier filing dates.
Petitioner not entitled for renewal of licence; Writ Petition dismissed.
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.
THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE NOUSHAD ALI
Writ Petition No.15139 of 2007
ORDER :
The grievance of the petitioner in this Writ Petition is that the first respondent/Revenue Divisional Officer, Ongole, Prakasam District has not renewed the authorisation in respect of the petitioner’s fair price shop despite submitting the required application.
The brief facts are that the petitioner was appointed as a permanent fair price shop dealer in respect of shop No.1, N.G.Padu Village and Mandal in the year 1993 and he was running the shop after obtaining renewals from time to time. The last renewal fell due in the month of March, 2007. He therefore allegedly filed an application on 23-01-2007 along with a Demand Draft and as no action was taken, he submitted another petition on 17-032007 along with a challan dated 15-03-2007. He filed another petition on 1307-2007 and despite the said repeated requests, the licence was not renewed. It is the case of the petitioner that since he has filed the application for renewal well within time in the prescribed manner, he is entitled for renewal of the licence.
The Respondent No.1/Revenue Divisional Officer has filed counteraffidavit.
He denied that the petitioner filed application either on 23-01-2007 or on 1703-2007.
It is stated that an application was filed only on 12-07-2007 and since the application was not filed within the prescribed time, the said application cannot be treated as valid as the licence expired on 31-03-2007 itself.
According to clause 5(5)(ii) of the A.P.State Public Distribution System Control Order 2003 an application for renewal should be made within one month after the expiry of the validity of the licence along with the prescribed fee and if no such application is made within the said period, the authorisation would seize to be valid.
In the instant case even though the petitioner has stated that he made an application on 23-01-2007 and also on 17-03-2007, the respondent has specifically denied it. The petitioner could not substantiate his statement by filing some material to show that the application was in fact made within the prescribed time. In the absence of some material, I am inclined to accept the statement of the first respondent/Revenue Divisional Officer that no such application was made within the prescribed time. The petitioner is, therefore, not entitled for renewal of the licence as sought for.
The Writ Petition is accordingly dismissed. There shall be no order as to costs.
________________ NOUSHAD ALI, J.
08th October, 2010. skmr
THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE NOUSHAD ALI
Writ Petition No.15139 of 2007
Date : 08-10-2010
Between : Chunduru Tirupathaiah .. Petitioner and The Revenue Divisional Officer, Ongole, Prakasam District and another .. Respondents
2 issues framed by the court
Whether the petitioner is entitled to renewal of fair price shop authorisation when application was filed outside prescribed time as alleged by the respondent.
Whether the petitioner could substantiate his version that applications were filed before the licence expiry despite respondent's denial and lack of material evidence.
1 provisions across 1 enactments
Chunduru Tirupathaiah
The Revenue Divisional Officer, Ongole, Prakasam District
Another
Noushad Ali
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
