Over 2 lakh Indian cases. Search powered by Google!

Case Details

USMAN ALI versus COMMISSIONER AND ANOTHER

High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Case Law Search

Indian Supreme Court Cases / Judgements / Legislation

Judgement


Usman Ali v. Commissioner And Another - WRIT - C No. 52282 of 2006 [2007] RD-AH 5909 (2 April 2007)

 

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

             COURT NO.21

Civil Misc. Writ Petition No. 52282 of 2006

Usman Ali...........................................................................Petitioner.

Versus.

The Commissioner Moradabad Division,

Moradabad and another...................................................Respondents

******

Hon.Tarun Agarwala,J.

The petitioner was allotted a fair price shop in the year 1990. The supplies were stopped in May, 2001. The petitioner filed a writ petition which was allowed and the order of stoppage of the supplies was set aside. In May 2005, a new Pradhan was elected and, it is alleged, that the new Pradhan, being inimical to the petitioner, made efforts and got the fair price shop of the petitioner suspended. The petitioner filed his reply and the authorities restored the supplies. However, by an order dated 24.1.2006 the licence of the fair price shop was cancelled. It is alleged that the petitioner filed a writ petition which was allowed and the order of cancellation was set aside and the matter was remitted back to the parties for reconsideration. Based on the directions of the High Court, the authority, after considering the explanation of the petitioner and other relevant factors, cancelled the fair price licence of the petitioner. The petitioner preferred an appeal which was dismissed. Consequently the writ petition.

The learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the impugned order has been passed without any application of mind and that there was no valid resolution of the Gaon Sabha and that the so called resolution which was placed before the authorities was a forged resolution. Consequently, in the absence of any valid resolution of the Gaon Sabha , the proceedings for initiating the cancellation of the fair price shop  was wholly illegal and without jurisdiction.

I have perused the impugned order and, I find, that there is no whisper about the allegations made by the petitioner with regard to the alleged forgery in the resolution of the Gaon Sabha nor has the petitioner annexed the memo of appeal filed before the Commissioner to show that he had raised such a ground. In the absence of the aforesaid, this Court is not inclined to dwell on a factual controversy raised for the first time in a writ jurisdiction. Further, from the perusal of the impugned orders, I find, that a large number of the card holders had given an affidavit before the authorities alleging irregularities in the supply of the kerosene oil by the petitioner. This affidavit have not been rebutted by the petitioner . Consequently, in view of the finding given by the authorities, this Court is not inclined to interfere in the impugned orders.

The writ petition is dismissed.

Dated: 2.4.2007

AKJ

             COURT NO.21

Civil Misc. Writ Petition No. 52282 of 2006

Usman Ali...........................................................................Petitioner.

Versus.

The Commissioner Moradabad Division,

Moradabad and another...................................................Respondents

******

Hon.Tarun Agarwala,J.

The petitioner was allotted a fair price shop in the year 1990. The supplies were stopped in May, 2001. The petitioner filed a writ petition which was allowed and the order of stoppage of the supplies was set aside. In May 2005, a new Pradhan was elected and, it is alleged, that the new Pradhan, being inimical to the petitioner, made efforts and got the fair price shop of the petitioner suspended. The petitioner filed his reply and the authorities restored the supplies. However, by an order dated 24.1.2006 the licence of the fair price shop was cancelled. It is alleged that the petitioner filed a writ petition which was allowed and the order of cancellation was set aside and the matter was remitted back to the parties for reconsideration. Based on the directions of the High Court, the authority, after considering the explanation of the petitioner and other relevant factors, cancelled the fair price licence of the petitioner. The petitioner preferred an appeal which was dismissed. Consequently the writ petition.

The learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the impugned order has been passed without any application of mind and that there was no valid resolution of the Gaon Sabha and that the so called resolution which was placed before the authorities was a forged resolution. Consequently, in the absence of any valid resolution of the Gaon Sabha , the proceedings for initiating the cancellation of the fair price shop  was wholly illegal and without jurisdiction.

I have perused the impugned order and, I find, that there is no whisper about the allegations made by the petitioner with regard to the alleged forgery in the resolution of the Gaon Sabha nor has the petitioner annexed the memo of appeal filed before the Commissioner to show that he had raised such a ground. In the absence of the aforesaid, this Court is not inclined to dwell on a factual controversy raised for the first time in a writ jurisdiction. Further, from the perusal of the impugned orders, I find, that a large number of the card holders had given an affidavit before the authorities alleging irregularities in the supply of the kerosene oil by the petitioner. This affidavit have not been rebutted by the petitioner . Consequently, in view of the finding given by the authorities, this Court is not inclined to interfere in the impugned orders.

The writ petition is dismissed.

Dated: 2.4.2007

AKJ


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.