Court No. - 10
Case :- WRIT - C No. - 69622 of 2015 Petitioner :- Kamla Sharan Respondent :- State Of U.P. & 3 Others Counsel for Petitioner :- Akhilesh Chandra Srivasta,Ramesh Chandra Pathak Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.
Hon'ble Mahesh Chandra Tripathi,J.
Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and Shri Rahul Malviya, learned Standing Counsel for the State respondent.
Petitioner is before this Court assailing the validity of order impugned dated 17.05.2000 passed by the Commissioner, Basti Region, Basti and the order dated 19.03.2015, whereby, the recall application, which has been filed for recall of order dated 17.05.2000, has been turned down.
Record in question reflects that the fair price shop of Gram Panchayat Devadiha, Nyay Panchayat Katarua, Basti has been settled in favour of the petitioner in the month of July 1990. This much is also reflected that certain complaints regarding irregular distribution of grains have been made. Thereafter an inquiry was conducted by Sub Divisional Magistrate, Basti and on the basis of recommendation dated 12.10.1998, the license of fair price shop of petitioner was suspended by an order dated 28.10.1998. Finally, by an order dated 19.11.1998, the license of Fair Price Shop in question has been cancelled. The said order has been assailed by petitioner by preferring Appeal no.7 of 1998 (Kamla Sharan vs. District Supply Officer, Basti and others) on 25.11.1998.
On the basis of restoration application as well as averment contained in the writ petition, it is claimed that on account of certain dispute between the family members, the petitioner had left the village and the aforesaid appeal in question was dismissed for want of prosecution on 17.05.2000. This is also an admitted situation that after more than 14 years of period, the restoration/recall application no.C2014170000738 alongwith delay condonation application has been preferred on 23.08.2014. The same has also been rejected by the order impugned.
In the facts and circumstances of the case, the Court is of the considered opinion that the petitioner was very much aware with the proceeding and he himself has instituted the appeal in question and no plausible reason has been given to justify his absence of more than 14 years and the restoration application has been filed as an afterthought and as such, there is no reason or occasion for this Court to interfere in the matter.
Writ Petition sans merit and accordingly
dismissed.
Order Date :- 28.11.2018 A. Pandey