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

2019 Supreme(All) 227

SIDDHARTHA VARMA
AKHLAQ – Appellant
Versus
STATE OF UP – Respondent


Advocates:
Advocate Appeared:
Syed Mehdi Haider Zaidi, Adv., U.C. Chaturvedi, Adv.

JUDGMENT

SIDDHARTHA VARMA, J.

1. This writ petition has been filed by the petitioner for quashing of the order dated 31.8.2017 which was passed by the Joint Commissioner (Food) Saharanpur Division, Saharanpur.

2. Initially when the respondent no. 4, who was the fair price shop dealer in the area where the petitioner was residing was not running the fair price shop properly, then the petitioner, who was a card holder, alongwith the other card holders, had filed various complaints. Upon an enquiry being held the licence of the respondent no. 4 was cancelled on 10.3.2017. However, when the appeal filed by the respondent no. 4 was allowed on 21.8.2017, the petitioner filed the instant writ petition.

3. Sri Brijesh Yadav has put in appearance on behalf of the respondent no. 4 and has also filed his written submissions. Though the counsel for the respondent no. 4 had submitted that the Appellate Order was correctly passed, he made a preliminary objection to the filing of the writ petition by saying that the petitioner who was a card holder and only a complainant had no locus standi to file the writ petition.

4. Learned counsel for the respondent no. 4 relied upon Dharam Raj vs. State of U.P.






















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
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon telegram-icon
whatsapp-icon Back to top