Budhiram vs Up Ayukt (Khadya Evam Rasad) … on 19 January, 2010

                                                                 Court No. 21

                  Civil Misc. Writ Petition No. 2236 of 2010

                                   Budhiram

                                    Versus

                             Up Ayukt and others

Hon'ble V.K.Shukla,J
      Brief background of the case is that one Tapesar, S/o Bansi has been
accorded fair price license and on account of various irregularities being
found proceedings were initiated for cancellation of his fair price shop
license and thereafter proceedings for cancellation were undertaken and
Sub-Divisional Officer, Hata, Distirct Kushinagar on 12.01.2009 cancelled
said fair price shop license. Petitioner thereafter was allotted fair price shop
on 02.03.2009. Against the said order of cancellation appeal has been filed
and said appeal has been allowed on 24.12.2009 and matter has been
remanded back to be decided afresh after affording opportunity of hearing.
Petitioner has come up before this Court by contending that his essential
commodities have been withheld.
      Accepting this position in the present case fair price shop license of
Tapesar was initially suspended and thereafter order of cancellation has
been passed then in the vacancy which has occurred therein petitioner has
been offered appointment by allotting said fair price shop license. Natural
consequence of the questioning of order dated 12.01.2009 is that there is
no vacancy and once there is no vacancy then petitioner has got no right to
continue. Petitioner's right is totally dependant on the order of cancellation.
      Fact of the matter is that for non-compliance of principle of natural
justice appeal in question has been allowed and matter has been remanded
back. Conduct of Tapesar is yet to be inquired by said committee
constituted under appellate order on 24.12.2009. Earlier fair price shop
license of respondent no. 6 was suspended then merely because on

24.12.2009 order has been passed same ipso facto does not give right to
Tapesar to start fair price shop and distribute essential commodities.

Tapesar has yet to clear himself and the matter has been remanded
back and earlier his fair price shop license has been under suspension, in
2

this background it is clarified that till Tapesar is not cleared of the charges in
the order dated 24.12.2009 petitioner’s continuance of fair price shop shall
be treated as an interim arrangement and in case order is passed in favour
of Tapesar then petitioner will have no right to claim any further
continuance.

With the above observation present writ petition is disposed of.
Dated 19.01.2010
Dhruv