SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Article Pause Article
judgment-img

2013 Supreme(Raj) 1420

RAJASTHAN HIGH COURT AT JAIPUR BENCH
Alok Sharma, J.
Ramesh Chand Meena - Appellant
Versus
State of Rajasthan & Ors. - Respondent
S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 5575 of 2013.
Decided On : 3-07-2013

Advocates:
For the Petitioner:S.B. Gupta, Advocate.
For the State: K. Verma, Addl. G.C.

The suspension of a fair price shop license cannot continue beyond 90 days of its issue without a regular inquiry or adverse order, as per Regulation 8(2) of the Order of 1976.

Headnote:

Regulation 8(2) - Suspension of Fair Price Shop License - The court held that the order of suspension of the license shall not be operative beyond 90 days of its issue as per Regulation 8(2) of the Rajasthan Food Grains and Other Essential Articles (Regulation of Distribution) Order, 1976. The petitioner was allowed to operate the fair price shop without hindrance, but the respondents were permitted to proceed with an inquiry against the petitioner for any breach of conditions.

Fact of the Case:

The petitioner challenged the order suspending their fair price shop license, arguing that the suspension could not continue beyond 90 days without a regular inquiry or adverse order.

Finding of the Court:

The court held that the order of suspension shall not be operative beyond 90 days of its issue, allowing the petitioner to operate the fair price shop without hindrance. The respondents were permitted to proceed with an inquiry against the petitioner for any breach of conditions.

Issues: Challenge to suspension of fair price shop license, interpretation of Regulation 8(2) of the Order of 1976.

Ratio Decidendi: The court interpreted Regulation 8(2) of the Order of 1976 to hold that the suspension of the license cannot continue beyond 90 days without a regular inquiry or adverse order.

Final Decision: The writ petition was allowed, and the petitioner was permitted to operate the fair price shop without hindrance, while the respondents were allowed to proceed with an inquiry against the petitioner for any breach of conditions.

JUDGMENT

1. - This petition has been filed challenging the order dated 15.03.2013, passed by District Supply Officer, Dausa suspending the petitioner's licence for running a fair price shop.

2. Counsel for the petitioner submits that subsequent to the order of suspension dated 15.03.2013, neither regular enquiry has been conducted, nor any adverse order has been passed so far. He submits that in these circumstances, continuation of the order of suspension under Regulation 8(2) of the Rajasthan Food Grains and Other Essential Articles (Regulation of Distribution) Order, 1976 (hereinafter 'the order of 1976') cannot sustain beyond 90 days of its issue and thereafter has to automatically cease. He submits that this continued effect of the order of suspension beyond 90 days of its issue is liable to be quashed and set aside. In support of his submissions, counsel has relied upon on the judgment of this Court in SBCWP No. 5404/07, Ramswroop v. State of Rajasthan & Ors., decided on 11.11.2008 , wherein it has been held that after expiry 90 days, the order of suspension cannot be continued any further.

3. Having heard the counsel for the parties and having perused material on record, this Court holds that the order of suspension of the licence of the petitioner on 15.03.2013 shall not be operative subsequent to 90 days of its issue in view of the provisions of Regulation 8(2) of the Order of 1976. Consequently, the petitioner would be allowed to operate his fair price shop for which he continues to be authorised without any hindrance from the order dated 15.03.2013. The respondents are however at liberty to proceed with an inquiry against the petitioner qua any breach of the conditions of the authorisation to run the fair price shop in accordance with law and pass any order thereon including an order of cancellation as permissible in law.

4. The writ petition stands allowed accordingly. Stay application needs no address in view of the petition having been allowed.Petition Allowed.

*******


Click Here to Read the rest of this document

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
whatsapp-icon Back to top