Judgments
Judgments
  1. Home
  2. /
  3. High Court Of Judicature at Allahabad
  4. /
  5. 2019
  6. /
  7. January

Chunubad vs State Of U P And Others

High Court Of Judicature at Allahabad|22 February, 2019
|

JUDGMENT / ORDER

Court No. - 10
Case :- WRIT - C No. - 4304 of 2019 Petitioner :- Chunubad Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 4 Others Counsel for Petitioner :- Anoop Kumar Srivastava Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.
Hon'ble Mahesh Chandra Tripathi,J.
The impleadment application moved on behalf of Daya Ram is allowed. Let necessary impleadment be carried out forthwith.
Heard Shri Anoop Kumar Srivastava, learned counsel for the petitioner; Shri Devesh Vikram, learned Standing Counsel for the State respondent nos.1 to 4 and Shri Rajesh Kumar, learned counsel appearing for the newly impleaded respondent no.6.
By means of present writ petition the petitioner is assailing the entire proceedings of allotment of fair price shop of Gram Panchayat Jaspura, District Banda by election process held on 24.1.2019 in pursuance of the direction of Block Development Officer, Jaspura, District Banda.
Initially the matter was taken up on 7.2.2019 and on the said date the Court had asked learned Standing Counsel to seek instructions in the matter. It was further directed that meanwhile, if any settlement/allotment in respect of the fair price shop in question is made, the same would be subject to final decision of the writ petition. Thereafter the matter was listed on 14.2.2019 and 21.2.2019 and on the request of learned Standing Counsel, the case was passed over.
When the matter is taken up today, Shri Devesh Vikram, learned Standing Counsel has placed instructions sent by Assistant Development Officer, Jaspura, Tehsil Pairani, District Banda dated 14.2.2019 on record, wherein it has been stated that in pursuance of the direction of the Block Development Officer, Jaspur dated 23.1.2019 the election for appointment of new fair price shop dealer was held on 24.1.2019 from 12.00 noon to 4.30 PM and since the law and order situation was critical on the spot, the authority concerned had no other option but to issue direction to exercise secret ballot paper in the election. In the said election total 10 persons participated and the newly impleaded respondent no.6 namely Dayaram secured highest votes (222 votes) and he was declared elected. The instruction is taken on record.
Learned counsel for the petitioner states that the procedure is provided in the Government orders dated 3.7.1990 and 17.8.2002 for calling open meeting of the Gaon Sabha for settlement of the fair price shop, as such the entire action so taken by the respondents is in teeth of the aforesaid Government orders dated 3.7.1990 and 17.8.2002 and this Court should come for rescue and reprieve the petitioner.
Confronted with this situation, Shri Devesh Vikram, learned Standing Counsel very fairly states that once the procedure is prescribed in the aforesaid Government orders and still both the Government orders hold the field, then the procedures are to be adhered for settlement of the fair price shop strictly in accordance with law.
This Court has proceeded to examine the record in question and perused both the Government orders dated 3.7.1990 and 17.8.2002 and finds that so far as the procedures adopted by the authorities are concerned, the same are not in consonance with the Government orders dated 3.7.1990 and 17.8.2002. It is paramount responsibility of the authority concerned to hold an open meeting of the Gaon Sabha for settlement of the fair price shop in question and in case there is any law and order problem on the spot, the authority would be at liberty to take help of the local police for maintaining the law and order situation.
Consequently, the writ petition is allowed and the matter is remitted back to the second respondent, Sub Divisional Magistrate, Pailani, District Banda to hold an open meeting of the Gaon Sabha for settlement of the fair price shop in question strictly in accordance with the Government orders dated 3.7.1990 and 17.8.2002 as expeditiously as possible and preferably within a period of one month from the date of receipt of certified copy of this order. In case there is any law and order problem on the spot, it is always open to the second respondent to take help of the local police.
Order Date :- 22.2.2019 RKP
Disclaimer: Above Judgment displayed here are taken straight from the court; Vakilsearch has no ownership interest in, reservation over, or other connection to them.
Title

Chunubad vs State Of U P And Others

Court

High Court Of Judicature at Allahabad

JudgmentDate
22 February, 2019
Judges
  • Mahesh Chandra Tripathi
Advocates
  • Anoop Kumar Srivastava