High Court of Judicature at Allahabad
Case Law Search
Ras Behari Singh v. State Of U.P. And Others - WRIT - C No. 41974 of 2006  RD-AH 13021 (4 August 2006)
Civil Misc. Writ Petition No. 41974 of 2006
Ras Behari Singh. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Petitioner.
Staste of U.P. and others. . . . . . . . . .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . Respondents.
Hon'ble A.K. Yog,J.
This writ petition has been filed challenging the impugned order dated 22.7.2006 (Annexure no,. 9 to the writ petition ) passed by respondent no. 2 by means of which another fair price shop licence/agreement has been granted in favour of one Awadhesh Yadav (respondent no.5 to the writ petition).
Heard learned counsel for the petitioner as well as the learned Counsel for the contesting respondents.
The dispute is regarding establishing two fair price shops in the village in violation of relevant criterion fixed by the government. It is submitted that second shop can only be allotted if there are more than 4000 units in the village. According to the petitioner second allotment has been obtained by manipulating the figures. There appears some force in the contention. A copy of letter of the Sub Divisional Magistrate dated 17.2.2006 addressed to the Block Development Officer, Dubhar district Ballia has been filed as Annexure no. 4 to the writ petition, which refers to the report dated 8.2.2005 of the Block Development Officer wherein it has been mentioned that total units in the concerned Gram Sabha were 3860.
It appears that at a later stage the Block Development Officer submitted a report vide letter dated 23.6.2006 wherein he has indicated that total units of the concerned Gram Panchayat are 4144. This is a question of fact. The documents filed with the petition show contradiction. In that view of the matter we direct the petitioner to file a fresh and comprehensive representation along with
certified copy of this order as well as complete copy of the Writ Petition with all Annexures before the District Magistrate, Ballia within three weeks from today and on such representation being filed, as stipulated above, the District Magistrate concerned shall decide the same within eight weeks of the receipt of the representation as contemplated above, exercising his unfettered discretion on the basis of record before him in accordance with relevant Rules, Government Orders, Scheme/Policy after hearing the parties concerned without being influenced by any of the observations in this judgment since this court has not entered into merits of the present case. Till decision of he petitioner's representation, the impugned order dated 22.7.2006 ( Annexure no. 9 to the writ petition ), if not already given effect to, shall be kept in abeyance and the same will be subject to the decision taken by the District Magistrate in the aforesaid representation within the stipulated time.
The writ petition is finally disposed of subject to the above directions.
No order as to costs.
Dated: 4. 8..2006
Double Click on any word for its dictionary meaning or to get reference material on it.