Court No. - 10
Case :- WRIT - C No. - 35537 of 2017 Petitioner :- Om Prakash Singh Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 3 Others Counsel for Petitioner :- Satyawan Shahi Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.,Dharam Deo Chauhan,Hritudhwaj Pratap Sahi,Ravindra Prakash Srivasta,Vijay Kumar Singh
Hon'ble Mahesh Chandra Tripathi,J.
Heard learned counsel for the petitioners, Shri Sanjay Kumar Singh, learned Standing Counsel for the State respondents.
The petitioner is before this Court assailing the validity of order dated 18.07.2017 passed by second respondent, whereby, the fair price shop license of petitioner has been cancelled. Further prayer has been made to command the second respondent to supply the essential commodities as and when it fall dues.
When the matter was taken up on 28.08.2017, this Court has proceeded to pass following order:-
"Learned Standing Counsel prays for and is permitted to file shot counter affidavit bringing on record the preliminary enquiry undertaken against the petitioner prior to passing of the suspension order dated 18.07.2017. It shall be specifically disclosed in the counter affidavit as to on what basis, doubt has been raised on the correctness of signatures of the members of Prashasnik Satarkata Samiti on the distribution certificate issued from June to October, 2016.
Until further order of this Court, the effect and operation of the suspension order dated 18.07.2017 passed by respondent no.2 Sub Divisional Officer, Tehsil Mehdawal, District Sant Kabir Nagar shall remain stayed. The supply of the essential commodities to the petitioner's shop shall be resumed forthwith.
Put up this matter on 14.09.2017 in the additional cause list."
After exchange of affidavits, finally this Court by an order dated 11.12.2018 has asked the learned Standing Counsel to seek instructions in the matter and place the original record.
In response thereof, learned Standing Counsel has informed to the Court that necessary instructions are received in the Court alongwith original record. The same has been perused and returned to the learned Standing Counsel.
While placing the record, he has raised preliminary objection regarding maintainability of the present writ petition on the ground that the petitioner has got efficacious alternative remedy to assail the validity of same by preferring an appeal before the Appellate Authority and as such, it is submitted that the petitioner may be relegated to assail the validity of the order impugned before the appellate forum.
Confronted with this situation, learned counsel for the petitioner prays that in case petitioner is relegated to the appellate forum, then for interregnum period, his interest may be protected.
In the facts and circumstances of the case, this Court is of the considered opinion that in case there is statutory alternative remedy, then there is no reason or occasion to bypass the said forum and as such, the present writ petition is disposed of with the observation that if the petitioner files an appeal alongwith stay application against the impugned order within 10 days' from today, the Court hopes and trusts that the Appellate Authority will decide the stay application on its merit within next three weeks and the appeal in question may also be decided within a period of two months thereafter without granting any unnecessary adjournment to either of the parties, but certainly after providing opportunity of hearing to all the stake holders in the matter. It is made clear that till the disposal of the stay application, the interim order so accorded by this Court shall continue.
Order Date :- 20.12.2018 A. Pandey