Over 2 lakh Indian cases. Search powered by Google!

Case Details

MURSALIN versus STATE OF U.P. AND OTHERS

High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Case Law Search

Indian Supreme Court Cases / Judgements / Legislation

Judgement


Mursalin v. State Of U.P. And Others - WRIT - C No. 13229 of 2006 [2006] RD-AH 5591 (8 March 2006)

 

This is an UNCERTIFIED copy for information/reference. For authentic copy please refer to certified copy only. In case of any mistake, please bring it to the notice of Joint Registrar(Copying).

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE OF ALLAHABAD

Hon'ble Vineet Saran,J

The license of the petitioner for Fair Price shop was suspended by the competent authority vide order dated 23.4.2005 and a show cause notice was issued to which a reply was submitted by the petitioner. After considering the same, by an order dated 11.11.2005 passed by the Licensing Authority, the license of the petitioner had been cancelled. Aggrieved by the said order the petitioner filed an appeal along with a stay application. Although the appeal is pending, the stay application of the petitioner has been rejected by the appellate authority vide order dated 23.12.2005. Aggrieved by the said order the petitioner has filed this writ petition.

I have heard learned counsel for the petitioner as well as learned Standing counsel for the respondents.

In the impugned order itself the appellate authority had fixed 19.1.2006 for hearing of the appeal. The petitioner has not mentioned anything in the writ petition as to what happened on the said date (19.1.2006) and as to whether the appeal has been heard or as to what is the next date fixed in the appeal.

Considering the facts and circumstances of this case and keeping in view that the stay application of the petitioner has been rejected more than two and half months back and the petitioner is unable to state as to what is the stage in the appeal before the appellate authority, I am not inclined to interfere with the impugned order. However, in the circumstances this writ petition is being disposed of with the direction that the appellate authority, Respondent no.5, shall hear and decide the appeal of the petitioner, in accordance with law, by a speaking order after giving opportunity of hearing to the petitioner, as expeditiously as possible, preferably within a period of six weeks from the date of filing of a certified copy of this order before him. Till the disposal of the appeal, no fresh license for the fair price shop in question shall be issued.

With the aforesaid observation/direction, this writ petition is disposed of. No order as to cost.

Dt/- 8.3.2006

dps

w.p. 13229.06


Copyright

Reproduced in accordance with s52(q) of the Copyright Act 1957 (India) from judis.nic.in, indiacode.nic.in and other Indian High Court Websites

Advertisement

dwi Attorney | dui attorney | dwi | dui | austin attorney | san diego attorney | houston attorney | california attorney | washington attorney | minnesota attorney | dallas attorney | alaska attorney | los angeles attorney | dwi | dui | colorado attorney | new york attorney | new jersey attorney | san francisco attorney | seattle attorney | florida attorney | attorney | london lawyer | lawyer michigan | law firm |

Tip:
Double Click on any word for its dictionary meaning or to get reference material on it.