The central legal point established in the judgment is the requirement for transparency and accountability in the decision-making process by the State authorities, especially in cases where specific criteria are to be followed for selection.

JUDGMENT

Moushumi Bhattacharya, J. - The dispute in the present writ petition relates to the creation of a M.R. Distributorship in Purba Bardhaman district of West Bengal where the petitioner no.1 and the respondent no. 8 are the rival applicants. The petitioners seek a mandamus on the State respondents to cancel the license issued to the respondent no. 8 for such Distributorship. By the impugned documents dated 9.11.2021 and 11.11.2021, the respondent no. 8 (Sonai Food Marketing) was authorised to act as Distributor under the West Bengal Public Distribution System (Maintenance & Control) Order, 2013 and the Director, Department of Food & Supplies was asked to accord online approval in favour of the respondent no. 8.

2. A brief outline of the proceedings filed by the petitioner no. 1 and the respondent no. 8 in relation to allocation of the M.R Distributorship is necessary before alluding to the contentions of the parties.

3. A vacancy Notification for the appointment of M.R. Distributor at Surekalna in the district of Purba Bardhaman was published on 23.7.2018. This was superseded by another Notification dated 9.1.2019. Both the publications were issued by the office of the District Controller, Food & Supplies, Purba Bardhaman. The concerned State respondents received nine applications including from the petitioner no. 1 and the respondent no. 8. However, the vacancy Notification was cancelled on 7.8.2019 by an order of the Department of Food and Supplies. This cancellation was challenged by the respondent no. 8 in WPO 360 of 2020 which was allowed by a learned Single Judge by a judgment dated 18.12.2020. The Court set aside the order dated 7.8.2019 by which the second vacancy Notification was cancelled and directed the respondent authorities to process the application of the respondent no. 8 for engagement as M.R. Distributor in accordance with law. The learned Judge relied on a Division Bench judgment of 9.10.2020 in FMA 913 of 2020 (Kultali Food Marketing Pvt. Ltd. vs. State of West Bengal) in coming to the conclusion that the order of 7.8.2019 pertaining to cancellation of engagement of M.R. Distributor was not proper.

4. The concerned respondents considered the application received for M.R. Distributorship pursuant the judgment dated 18.12.2020, but found the applications of the petitioner no. 1 and the respondent no. 8 to be ineligible. Aggrieved by the decision, the petitioners filed a writ petition being WPA No. 5843 of 2021 praying for appointment of the petitioner. The said writ petition was taken up for hearing by a learned Judge and by an order dated 3.3.2021, the Court gave directions for affidavits and clarified that in the event the State respondents engaged any distributor with reference to the subject matter of the writ petition, the said act will not create any equity in favour of the engaged distributor.

5. The respondent no. 8 filed WPA No. 4928 of 2021 challenging the rejection of its application. The said writ petition was finally dismissed by a judgment and order dated 30.4.2021. The aforesaid judgment was challenged by the respondent no. 8 and the appeal was allowed by the Division Bench by its judgment dated 26.8.2021 whereby the order of the Single Bench was set aside and the State respondents were directed to process the application of the respondent no. 8 for M.R. Distributorship in accordance with law. The State respondents considered the application of the respondent no. 8 in terms of the order of the Division Bench (according to the State respondents) and issued the M.R. Distributorship to the respondent no. 8 on 9.9.2021.

6. The issue of license to the respondent no. 8 is the subject matter of challenge in the present writ petition.

7. The basis of the petitioners' grievance is two-fold. First, the selection of the respondent no. 8 as M.R. Distributor for the particular block in Purba Bardhaman and second, the rejection of the petitioners' application for the said distributorship. Learned Counsel appe