Court No. - 45
Case :- WRIT - C No. - 20234 of 2018 Petitioner :- Shambhu Nath Yadav Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 5 Others Counsel for Petitioner :- Ramesh Chandra Mishra Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.,Dharam Deo Chauhan
Hon'ble Ajay Bhanot,J.
The resolution was passed by the village panchayat Mishrawaliya Mishra, District-Sant Kabir Nagar on 16.2.2018 recommending the name of respondent No.6 for appointment as the fair price shop dealer of the aforesaid village panchayat. The contention of the learned counsel for the petitioner is that a number of criminal cases are pending against the respondent No.6. He is consequently ineligible appointed as the fair price shop dealer of the aforesaid village panchayat. The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that he has already made a representation to the respondent No.3.
The prayer of the learned counsel for the petitioner is that since the respondent No.6 is ineligible and the petitioner secured second highest votes in the aforesaid meeting, he is eligible to be appointed.
Per contra, Shri Siddharth Singh, learned Additional Chief Standing Counsel submits that these are issues of fact which need investigation by the competent authority in the first instance.
The contention of the petitioner is misconceived. In case the resolution is bad in law, then a fresh resolution will have to be passed. For the simple reason that if respondent No.6 is not in the fray, one does not know the shift in the voting percentage in favour of the petitioner or any other candidate. The basis on which the said relief is claimed is speculative. The prayer is rejected.
At this stage, the petitioner recasts his prayer. The sole prayer of the learned counsel for the petitioner is that his representation may be decided within a stipulated period of time.
It is open to the petitioner to submit a representation to the Sub-Divisional Magistrate giving details of the ineligibility of respondent No.6 to be appointed as the fair price shop dealer. Such representation shall be made within one month from today. The S.D.M. shall decide the aforesaid representation within two months from the date of receipt of a certified copy of this order along with the aforesaid representation. Till the decision of the representation of the petitioner, a formal letter of appointment shall not be issued to the respondent No.6.
With the aforesaid direction, the writ petition is disposed of.
Order Date :- 29.5.2018 Ashish Tripathi