The case is called out.
The present writ petition is filed against the opposite parties, the State of U.P. and other instrumentalities like District Magistrate, Sub-Divisional Magistrate, Block Development Officer as opposite parties nos.1 to 4 under Article 226 of the Constitution of India.
The copy of the writ petition is received in the office of C.S.C., learned A.C.S.C. is present on behalf of State to response the petition.
On bare perusal of the pleadings in the writ petition, it appears in para 6 that pursuant to the advertisement for allotment of fair price shop dated 17.04.2018, an open meeting of Gram Sabha was held in presence of State authorities in which proposal has been made in favour of petitioner and the petitioner has been selected for grant of license of fair price shop in question. The copy of the proposal dated 15.05.2018 is made annexure no.2 to the petition.
Para 8 of the petition further states that irrespective of the validity, proposal for allotment in the name of petitioner, the opposite party no.4 illegally and arbitrarily reserved the shop in question for ex-army man beyond the terms of advertisement and referred the matter for fresh allotment without cancelling the earlier proposal for allotment in the name of petitioner. Against the said arbitrariness and illegality in the manner, the State authorities, who are adamant to allot the shop in question. They are doing on their own, irrespective of the original proposal made in the meeting held in due and procedural manner as required in the Act, the present petition is moved. Before that a representation was also moved dated 28.11.2019 is made annexure no.6 to the petition, is on record.
Though the representation of the petitioner is pending but from the gesture and adamancy shown by the opposite party no.4, the petitioner is apprehensive that his representation would not be considered and decided in accordance with law. Therefore, he seeks interference of the Court against the said arbitrariness as pleaded by him and illegality on the part of opposite party in allotment of fair price shop.
Learned A.C.S.C. informs that there is a complete remedy if any order is passed against the petitioner provided in the Act, therefore, he need not to worry. But so far as the request of the learned counsel for the petitioner is concerned, unless an order is passed on the representation, no cause of action for moving further to avail the remedy available in the Act is possible therefore, the prayer of the petitioner have merit and genuineness.
In view of the aforesaid facts, learned A.C.S.C. would have no objections if any such direction is given to the opposite party no.3-Sub-Divisional Magistrate.
Accordingly, the opposite party no.3 is directed to this effect that the representation of the petitioner dated 28.11.2019 be decided in the light of facts averred by the petitioner in this writ petition. The copy whereof alongwith the certified copy of the order will be placed before it, within a reasonable time not beyond one month from the date, certified copy of the order is placed.
With the aforesaid directions, the writ petition is disposed of.
Order Date :- 19.12.2019 Saurabh