JUDGMENT :

Jay Sengupta, J.

1. This is an application under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying for quashing of the Memo Bearing Number 816/1(4)/FA/IJ/MR-40/2009 dated 10.11.2009 issued by the Director, DDP & S, F & S Department, West Bengal.

2. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits as follows. The petitioner’s father and uncle, jointly as partners, had been granted M.R. Distributorship license under the name and style of M/S. G.C. Kundu & D.N. Kundu. On 30.09.1991, after death of the petitioner’s father and uncle, the petitioner and his cousin brother namely, Pradipta Kundu had jointly been granted M.R. Distributorship license on compassionate ground under the same name and style. In 1999, due to medical ground, the petitioner temporarily retired from the said distributorship business and his cousin brother namely, Pradipta Kundu was granted distributorship license as sole proprietor under the same name and style of M/S. G.C. Kundu & D.N. Kundu. On 06.03.2004 Pradipta Kundu, who was bachelor, died only at the age of 38 years. On 14.05.2005, the brother of late Pradipta Kundu namely, Prasun Kundu on his behalf and on behalf of his sister Smt. Meghna Kundu being the only legal heirs of Late Pradipta Kundu applied for grant of distributorship license in favour of the petitioner, enclosing therein prescribed application, submitted by the petitioner. On 20.05.2008, the Sub-Divisional Controller (F & S), Ranaghat instructed the Area Inspector, Ranaghat, Block – I to enquire and submit report. 20.10.2010 the Area Inspector, Ranaghat, Block – I, after conducting enquiry, submitted report recommending the petitioner’s prayer. On 10.11.2008 the Sub-Divisional Controller (F & S), Ranaghat sought police verification report. On 23.12.2008, the Superintendent of Police, D.E.B., Nadia submitted report, saying that nothing could be found against the petitioner. On 30.04.2009, the petitioner submitted reminder. On 27.05.2009, a demand justice submitted. On 04.08.2009, relying on the G.O. dated 28.05.1996, this Court passed an order directing the Director, DDP & S to take a decision on the prayer of the petitioner. On 10.11.2009 the Director, DDP & S, rejected the petitioner’s prayer, relying on a subsequent G.O. dated 18.11.2004. The resultant vacancy notice on the subject location, arose due to death of cousin brother of the petitioner, was notified on 01.09.2022. Since the Hon’ble Court by its order dated 04.08.2009, passed in W.P. 764 of 2009, quoting a Government Circular dated 28.05.1996, directed the Director, DDP & S to consider the prayer of the petitioner, the Director, DDP & S could not reject the prayer of the petitioner relying on a subsequent circular dated 18.11.2004. It was settled principle of law that the law prevailing on the date of occurring vacancy i.e, the date of death of the Distributor/Dealer, shall govern the application for compassionate appointment and since in the instant case petitioner’s bachelor cousin brother being the M.R. distributor died on 06.03.2004 and at that material point of time Government Circular dated 28.05.1996 was operating/prevailing in the field, which extended the benefit of compassionate appointment to the next kin of the deceased dealer/distributor, the petitioner being the cousin brother of the bachelor distributor with NOC from all the legal heirs of the deceased distributor was very much entitled to get distributorship license on compassionate ground. It was the existing practice and the State policy also that K. Oil license and distributor license shall be given to the same persons for conveniences of the consumers to lift their both the allotted quota of K. Oil and ration articles from the same shop. The Circular/G.O’s, which was prevailing on the date of occurring vacancy i.e., date of death of the dealers/distributors, shall only be taken note of at the time of considering application for compassionate appointment. Reliance was placed on 2016 (4) WBLR (Cal) 161, Arvind