Court No. - 10
Case :- WRIT - C No. - 31489 of 2018
Petitioner :- Shiv Kumar Dubey
Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 07 Others
Counsel for Petitioner :- Arvind Prabodh Dubey,Ramesh Rai
Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.
Hon'ble Mahesh Chandra Tripathi,J.
Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and Shri B.B. Pandey, learned Chief Standing Counsel alongwith Shri Sheetala Prasad Dubey, learned Standing Counsel for the State respondents.
Petitioner is before this Court assailing the validity of order dated 30.08.2018 passed by Deputy Collector, Padrauna, whereby, the license of fair price shop in question has been cancelled on the ground that the son of the petitioner has been elected as Gram Pradhan of the village concerned. Further prayer has been made to ask the fourth respondent to restore the license of fair price shop forthwith and to command the respondents not to interfere in any manner running the fair price shop situated in Village Sohnariya, Block and Tehsil Padrauna, District Kushinagar and release the essential commodities in favour of the petitioner.
The controversy in hand has already been settled by the Division Bench of this Court in Ram Murat vs. Commissioner Azamgarh Divisional and others, Writ Petition no.12850/2003, 2006 LawSuit(All)1021, wherein, it has been held that para 4.7 of the G.O. dated 03.07.1990 was applicable only at the time of grant of license and it was not applicable to the cases of those persons, who had already been granted licence. But after enforcement of the G.O. dated 18.07.2002, if any licence holder or his relation as defined in para 4.7 of the G.O. dated 03.07.1990 is elected as Pradhan or Up-Pradhan, his licence shall be liable to be cancelled irrespective of he fact that the licence was issued to him prior to enforcement of the G.O. dated 18.07.2002 and this Government Order, after its enforcement is applicable, to all licence holders irrespective of the fact that their licences had been granted earlier.
In view of the above, this Court is of the considered opinion that there is no illegality or infirmity in the order impugned and as such, no interference is required in the same.
Consequently, the writ petition is dismissed.
Order Date :- 27.2.2019
A. Pandey