Court No. - 10
Case :- WRIT - C No. - 58804 of 2017 Petitioner :- Javed Respondent :- Joint Commissioner (Food) Meerut And 4 Others Counsel for Petitioner :- Indra Mani Tripathi Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.
Hon'ble Mahesh Chandra Tripathi,J.
Heard Shri Indra Mani Tripathi, learned counsel for the petitioner and Shri Sanjay Kumar Singh, learned Standing Counsel. Shri Anand Prakash Dubey argued in support of his impleadment application.
The supplementary rejoinder affidavit is taken on record.
The petitioner is before this Court assailing the suspension and cancellation order dated 22.6.2017 and 14.9.2017 passed by second respondent and for a direction to the respondents to insure proper, and regular supply of commodities to the petitioner’s fair price shop and allow him distribution amongst relevant card holders of the village in question and for a direction to the respondents not to interfere in peaceful running of fair price shop of the petitioner.
On the matter being taken up on 11.12.2017 the Court has proceeded to pass the following interim order:-
"The contention of the petitioner is that when the suspension order and the show cause notice were issued to him under the Uttar Pradesh Essential Commodities (Regulation of Sale and Distribution Control) Order, 2016 which was published in the U.P. Gazette on 10th of August 2016 then thereafter all proceedings should have been under taken under the Uttar Pradesh Essential Commodities (Regulation of Sale and Distribution Control) Order, 2016 and he submits that in his reply in paragraph 9, he had specifically taken this ground.
Under such circumstances, he submits that proceedings as were undergone were pursued under a wrong control order of 2004.
Matter requires consideration.
Learned Standing Counsel may file his counter affidavit within a month. Put up this case on 23.01.2018 in the additional cause list.
Till the next date of listing impugned order dated 22.06.2017 and 14.09.2017 shall remain in abeyance.
The essential commodities would be distributed in the manner they are being distributed as of today."
On the matter being taken up today, Shri Siddharth Singh, learned Addl. Chief Standing Counsel submits that admittedly in the present matter appeal in question is pending consideration. Once indulgence has already been granted by this Court by staying the orders impugned, in such situation the State has no objection in case the appellate authority may be asked to decide the appeal in question on merits of the case within stipulated period and till the disposal of the same the interim order so accorded by this Court on 11.12.2017 may be directed to be continued. He has also contended that so far as relevant Government Orders of 2004 and 2016 are concerned, nowhere any procedure for cancellation of fair price shop has been mentioned. The procedure for cancellation of fair price shop is provided in the government Order dated 29th July, 2004 and as such the ground as has been taken before this Court is unsustainable. In support of his submissions, he has placed reliance on the judgment in Union of India v. Khazan Singh, AIR 1992 SC 1535.
On the other hand, Shri Indra Mani Tripathi, learned counsel for the petitioner has contended that the action taken by the respondents is in teeth of the dictum of this Court in Sudheer Kumar v. State of U.P. & Ors., Writ-C No.44174 of 2016 (Sudheer Kumar v. State of U.P. & Ors.) and as such the orders impugned are unsustainable.
The Court has proceeded to examine the record in question and find that the issue as has been raised before this Court by means of present writ petition is academic in nature and at this state this Court is not inclined to venture into such dispute. However, in the interest of justice, the Court finds that the appeal in question is liable to be decided expeditiously. The petitioner shall have opportunity to raise all the grounds, which have been raised before this Court, before the appellate authority.
Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, without expressing any opinion on the merits of the issue and with the consent, the writ petition stands disposed of asking the appellate authority to consider and decide the appeal in question in accordance with law expeditiously and preferably within three months from the date of production of certified copy of this order. The parties shall also make every endeavour that the proceeding be finalised without any further delay. For a period of three months or till the disposal of appeal, whichever is earlier, the interim order so accorded by this Court on 11.12.2017 shall continue. The impleadment application is also disposed of.
Order Date :- 29.11.2018 SP/