Administrative orders impacting livelihoods are void if passed without adhering to principles of natural justice. When an order is passed in the absence of an incarcerated party, the appellate authority must overlook technical delays in filing to prevent the denial of a fair hearing.

JUDGMENT

1. Rule returnable forthwith. Learned Assistant Government Pleader Ms. Nirali Sarda, waives service of notice of Rule for and on behalf of the respondents – State Authorities.

2. With the consent of the learned counsel appearing for the respective parties, the petition has been taken up for final hearing today.

3. By way of present petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India read with the provisions of the Gujarat Essential Commodities (Licensing to Fair Price Shop) Order, 2004, petitioner has prayed for the following reliefs :

(a) YOUR LORDSHIPS be pleased to issue a writ of mandamus or any other appropriate writ, order and/or direction and be pleased to quash and set aside the order dated 05.04.2021 (Ann. ‘J’) passed by the respondent no. 2 rejecting the appeal filed by the petitioner on the ground of delay of 2 years and 7 months and the order dated 21.09.2022 (Ann. ‘M’) passed by the respondent no. 1 refusing to entertain the Revision Application on the ground that the Respondent no. 2 has not passed the impugned order on merits but it is dismissed on the ground of delay as being illegal, invalid, unjust, unfair, without jurisdiction and competence, null & void, against the principles of natural justice and violative of Arts. 14, 19 and 21 of the Constitution of India.

(b) YOUR LORDSHIPS be pleased to stay the further operation, implementation and execution of the order dated 21.09.2022 (Ann. ‘M’) passed by the respondent no. 1, order dated 05.04.2021 (Ann. ‘J’) passed by the respondent no. 2 and 11.05.2018 (Ann. ‘E’) passed by the respondent no. 3 pending the admission, hearing and final disposal of this petition;

(c) YOUR LORDSHIPS be pleased to direct the respondent authorities to permit the petitioner to run his fair price shop which was being run by him prior to cancellation/suspension of his license pending the admission, hearing and final disposal of this petition;

(d) YOUR LORDSHIPS be pleased to pleased to grant such other and further relief/s, as are deemed fit, in the interest of justice.

4. Brief facts giving rise to the present petition are that, in the year 1981, father of the petitioner was granted retail license being no. 71/1981 to run the fair price shop, however, the father of the petitioner expired on 31.07.2016 and therefore, the petitioner had applied for transferring the said license on his name on the ground of heirship under the policy of the State of Government. That, after following due procedure of law, the Prant Officer, Surat City by the order dated 19.09.2016 transferred the license on the name of petitioner from the name of his father on the ground of heirship. That, one Sonalben Narendrabhai Tiwari gave written complaint dated 23.12.2017 to the respondent No. 2 alleging that she was holding a ration card attached with the shop of the petitioner and the petitioner has given the said shop on rent to one Kiran Gopalbhai Khinchi. It was further alleged that, though the said Sonalben was not given the stock of wheat and rice, on her name stock of wheat and rice was issued from January, 2017 to November, 2017 and thereby created fake documents and illegally disposed of stock of wheat and rice. That, the said Sonalben also filed the criminal complaint against the petitioner with Pandesara Police Station, Surat on 02.01.2018 for the offences punishable under Sections 406, 409, 420, 465, 471, 120-B of IPC and later on, IPC Section 467 and Section 7 of the Essential Commodities Act and Sections 65 and 66(c) of the IT Act also came to be add