P. S. MISHRA, C. J.

( 1 ) HEARD. On the facts of this case we are inclined to interfere with the direction of the learned Single Judge and order instead that the Revenue Divisional officer must complete the enquiry within a reasonable time, preferably within one month from the date of receipt of a copy of the order and until the disposal of the enquiry the status quo as on the date of filing of the writ petition shall be maintained.

( 2 ) LEARNED Counsel for the respondent-writ petitioner has however contended before us that the appellant who has entered as a dealer on a licence temporarily granted to her in the vacancy on account of the cancellation/ suspension of the licence of the writ petitioner-respondent has no locus standi in the matter as the challenge to the order of cancellation / suspension of the licence of the writ petitioner-respondent in no way involves the appellant. He has in short argued that for the proceeding which requires examination whether the cancellation/suspension of the licence of the petitioner-respondent is valid or not is a dispute between the petitioner-respondent on the one hand and the competent authority on the other. The appellant herein, thus, according to the learned Counsel for the petitioner-respondent, has no locus standi.

( 3 ) WHO is a person aggrieved who can move the Court under Art. 226 of the constitution and who in the event of any order made in a proceeding under art. 226 of the Constitution can be a person who can seek the leave of (he Court to appeal against the order, however, are questions which have received sufficient attention of the Courts in India. In Himalaya Tiles and Marble (P) Ltd. vs. Francies Victor Coutinbo speaking on the meaning to be given to the expression person interested in the Land Acquisition Act the Supreme Court has stated:"thus, the preponderance of judicial opinion seems to favour the view that the definition of person interested must be liberally construed so as to include a body, local authority, or a company for whose benefit the land is acquired and who is bound under an agreement to pay the compensation. In our opinion, this view accords with the principles of equity, justice and good conscience. How can it be said that a person for whose benefit the land is acquired and who is to pay the compensation is not a person interested even though its stake may be extremely vital?"the most candid, however, discussion on the subject of locus standi is found in the judgment of the Supreme Court in the case of Jasbhai Desai vs. Roshan Kumar in which it is pointed out that in a sense, the scope and nature of the power conferred by Article 226 is wider than that exercised by the writ Courts in england. The Supreme Court has however pointed out:". . . . . HOWEVER, the adoption of the nomenclature of English writ, with the prefix nature of super added indicates that the general principles grown over the years in the English Courts, can, shorn of unnecessary technical procedural restrictions, and adopted to the special conditions of this vast country, in so far as they do not conflict with any provision of the constitution, or the law declared by this Court, be usefully considered in directing the exercise of this discretionary jurisdiction in accordance with well recognised rules of practice. "making a detailed study of this rule of practice the Supreme Court in the said judgment had pointed out:"according to most English decisions, in order to have the locus standi to invoke certiorari jurisdiction, the petitioner should be an aggrieved person and, in a case of defect of jurisdiction, such a petitioner will be entitled to a writ of certiorari as a matter of course, but if he does not fulfil that character, and is a stranger , the Court will, in its discretion, deny him this extraordinary remedy, save in very special circumstances. "after referring to the decisions of various Courts in India and England and the practice in United States about the locus

Click Here to Read the rest of this document