Court No. - 38
Case :- WRIT - C No. - 24747 of 2020 Petitioner :- Sunil Kumar Rathor Respondent :- State of U.P. and Another Counsel for Petitioner :- Shiv Raj Singh Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.
Hon'ble Saumitra Dayal Singh,J.
Challenge has been raised to the order dated 05.10.2020 by which the petitioner's fair price shop license has been cancelled and challenge has also raised to the recovery order dated 11.04.2020.
At the outset, a preliminary objection has been raised by the learned standing counsel that the order impugned is appealable. In reply, learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the order dated 05.10.2020 is wholly ex-parte and it has been passed while the petitioner remained in jail for a long duration from 15.06.2020 to 29.09.2020, thus, he could not file reply.
Merits of the submissions advanced by the learned counsel for the petitioner apart, it is seen that the fair price shop license of the petitioner had been suspended vide order dated 06.04.2020. Pursuant thereto, the recovery order was passed on 11.04.2020 and subsequently in absence of reply, the cancellation order has been passed on 05.10.2020. Though it is true that the present petition was filed on 09.11.2020 and has remained pending for almost two months before it has been placed before the court, at the same time, it cannot be lost sight that the fair price shop license remained suspended for almost seven months before the present petition came to be filed in the month of November, 2020. In view of that fact alone, I am not inclined to exercise discretionary jurisdiction under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, in face of statutory alternative remedy available to the petitioner where the ground of challenge being raised in the present petition may be canvassed with equal force.
At this stage, learned counsel for the petitioner has pressed that grave hardship is caused to the petitioner owing to the spread of the pandemic Covid-19 and also his imprisonment for almost three months and some latitude may be exercised in so far and appeal that is proposed to be filed by the petitioner may be heard and decided on merits, in an expeditious manner.
The present petition is disposed of with the direction that in case the petitioner files an statutory appeal against the impugned order within a period of ten days from today along with a copy of this order, it is expected that the said appeal would be heard and entertained on merits and decided as expeditiously as possible preferably within a period of three months from the date of appeal being filed.
It is made clear that this court has not examined the matter on merits.
Order Date :- 5.1.2021 SA