Over 2 lakh Indian cases. Search powered by Google!

Case Details

RAFI UDDIN versus STATE OF U.P. THRU' SECRETARY ITS PRINCIPAL SECRETARY & ORS.

High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Case Law Search

Indian Supreme Court Cases / Judgements / Legislation

Judgement


Rafi Uddin v. State Of U.P. Thru' Secretary Its Principal Secretary & Ors. - WRIT - C No. 27039 of 2006 [2006] RD-AH 10341 (25 May 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

                                Reserved

Civil Misc. Writ Petition no. 27039 of 2006

Rafi Uddin . . . .  . . . . .  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  . .  . . . .  .Petitioner.

                            versus

State of U.P. and others. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  . . . .  . . .  Respondents.

  ---

Hon'ble Yatindra Singh,J.

Hon'ble R.K.Rastogi,J.

       ( Delivered by Hon'ble R.K. Rastogi,J.)

  ---

This is a writ petition  against order dated 5.5.2006 passed by the Sub Divisional Magistrate, Moradabad, respondent no.2, cancelling  fair price shop licence of the petitioner on the ground that his brother, Naseem Ali has been elected as Gram Pradhan of village  Sahu Nagla in the year 2005.

We have heard counsel for the petitioner and the Standing Counsel for the respondents.

The point in controversy as well as the G.Os. issued by the Government on this point have been considered by us in our judgment of date in Civil Misc. Writ Petition no. 12850 of 2003 and 31 other writ petitions.  We have held in that judgment that under the G.O. no. F.3967/29-Khadya-6 of 1990 dated 3.7.1990  the fair price shop licence of a person can be cancelled  on the election of his brother as village Pradhan only in that contingency  when that licensee and his brother are residing in the same house and their food is also being cooked in the joint kitchen. A perusal of the impugned order  passed by the Sub Divisional  Magistrate, Moradabad, respondent no. 2  reveals that no finding has been recorded by  the Sub Divisional Magistrate  on this point. This order passed by him cannot be upheld and is liable to be set aside.

The writ petition is, therefore, deserves to be allowed. The impugned order dated 5.5.2006 cancelling the  licence of fair price shop of the petitioner  is liable to be quashed.

The petitioner  shall  within a month from the date of this order  file a representation before  the Sub Divisional Magistrate, Moradabad, respondent no. 2 stating his case  on this point and thereafter the  learned Magistrate shall after  providing  an opportunity of hearing to the petitioner  decide the matter a fresh.

With these observations, the writ petition is allowed and the  impugned order dated 5.5.2006 is quashed.

Dated:

RPP


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.