Court No. - 27
Case :- WRIT - C No. - 15129 of 2018 Petitioner :- Jitendra Nath Yadav Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 5 Others Counsel for Petitioner :- Brij Bhushan Pandey Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.,Manoj Kumar Yadav
Hon'ble Jayant Banerji,J.
Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and Sri Manoj Kumar Yadav, learned counsel appearing for the Gaon Sabha Sauram, respondent no.6 and the learned Standing Counsel appearing for respondent nos. 1 to 5.
The contention of the petitioner is that by means of an order passed on 6 November 2017 the District Supply Officer in public interest attached the Fair Price Shop that was allotted to him to Sri Rajendra Yadav, fair price shop dealer of Gaon Sabha Karanda, Tehsil Sadar, District Ghazipur, which is a malicious exercise of power.
From the record it appears that earlier a writ petition bearing no. Writ-C No. 60302 of 2017 (Jitendra Nath Yadav Vs. State of U.P. And 5 Ors.) was filed by the petitioner, which was finally disposed of by the Court by means of order dated 5 March 2018. The writ petition was filed only for a writ of mandamus to be issued to the Licensing Authority to re-verify the stock of the shop of the petitioner and to consider the representation of the petitioner dated 25 November 2017. It was observed by the Court that re-verification of the stock has already been done in pursuance of the order passed by this Court. It was observed by the Court that the petitioner has submitted his explanation to the show cause notice issued by the Licensing Authority and the Licensing Authority was directed to take a decision on the basis of explanation submitted by the petitioner and to call for additional documentary evidence, if need be from the petitioner and pass appropriate orders thereon within a period of four weeks from the date a certified copy of this order is produced before him.
The aforesaid order of the Court was filed before the Sub- Divisional Magistrate, Sadar, Ghazipur on 12 March 2018 along with an application.
Now this writ petition has been filed for quashing the order dated 6 November 2017 passed by the respondent no.3, District Supply Officer, District Ghazipur, whereby the licence of the fair price shop of the petitioner was suspended.
It is obvious that the order suspending the licence of the petitioner attaching the fair price shop of the petitioner to another fair price shop dealer is prior to the judgment of this Court passed in the previous writ petition on 5 March 2018. In this regard, allegation has been made that the licence of the fair price shop of the petitioner was suspended on a back date i.e. 6 November 2017 and was served on the petitioner on 16 December 2017.
Thus, from the record it is apparent that the petitioner chose not to challenge the impugned order of suspension dated 6 November 2017 in the prior writ petition despite the fact of his having knowledge of the order during the pendency of the previous writ petition.
In view of this fact, the Court does not deem it appropriate to interfere in the order passed by the District Supply Officer dated 6 November 2017. However, it will be open for the petitioner to avail an alternative remedy by way of filing an appeal under Clause 13(3) of the U.P.E.C. (Regulation of Sale & Distribution Control) Order, 2016.
In this view of the matter, it will be open for the petitioner to prefer an appeal in accordance with law before the appropriate authority.
With this observation the writ petition is dismissed.
Order Date :- 26.4.2018 MAA/-
(Jayant Banerji,J.)