Asif Khan Mustafa Khan vs The Deputy Commissioner ...

Citation : 2017 Latest Caselaw 8762 Bom
Judgement Date : 16 November, 2017

Bombay High Court
Asif Khan Mustafa Khan vs The Deputy Commissioner ... on 16 November, 2017
Bench: V.M. Deshpande
Judgment

                                                                                  wp7252.17 28

                                               1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY,
           NAGPUR BENCH, NAGPUR

                      WRIT PETITION NO.7252 OF 2017

Asif Khan Mustafa Khan, aged about 49
years, Occupation - Business, r/o At
post Wadegaon, Taluka - Balapur, District
Akola.                                                                         ..... Petitioner.

                                     ::   VERSUS   ::

1. The Deputy Commissioner (Supplies),
Akola, Division, Akola.

2. The District Supply Officer, Akola,
Taluka and District Akola.                            ..... Respondents.

================================================================
          Shri F.T. Mirza, Counsel for the petitioner.
          Shri M.J. Khan, Assistant Government Pleader for the 
          respondents/State.
================================================================


                                CORAM : V.M. DESHPANDE, J.
                                DATE    :  NOVEMBER 16, 2017.

ORAL JUDGMENT

1.               Heard   learned   counsel   Shri   F.T.   Mirza   for   the

petitioner   and   learned   Assistant   Government   Pleader   Shri

M.J. Khan for the respondents/State.


                                                                                        .....2/-


  ::: Uploaded on - 21/11/2017                                   ::: Downloaded on - 22/11/2017 01:04:22 :::
 Judgment

                                                                    wp7252.17 28

                                      2

2.              Rule.   Rule is made returnable forthwith.   Heard

finally by consent of learned counsel for both the parties.


3.              The   petitioner,   before   this   Court,   is   having

authorization   to   run   a   Fair   Price   Shop   situated   at   village

Wadegaon,  Taluka Balapur, District  Akola.    On 29.9.2017 his

shop   was   visited   by   an   inspection   officer   from   the   Food

Supply Department. He found that quantity of Wheat is deficit

by 3.90 quintals.  Whereas, Rice was found in excess quantity

to   the   extent   of   2.54   quintals.     Consequently,   a   show   cause

notice   dated   5.10.2017   was   issued   against   the   present

petitioner as to why action should not be taken against him.


4.              Pursuant   to   the   said   show   cause   notice,   the

petitioner   appeared   before   the   District   Supply   Officer   with

his   explanation   and   also   filed   his   explanation   along   with

representation from the consumers that they do not have any

dispute or grudge against the petitioner.  



                                                                           .....3/-


  ::: Uploaded on - 21/11/2017                       ::: Downloaded on - 22/11/2017 01:04:22 :::
 Judgment

                                                                    wp7252.17 28

                                      3

5.              The   District   Supply   Officer   passed   an   order   on

16.10.2017.     By   the   said   order,   the   District   Supply   Officer

found   that   since   Wheat   was   found   to   be   less   and   Rice   was

found   to   be   in   excess,   it   requires   a   detailed   enquiry.

Therefore, he directed the Tahsildar to record statements of

cardholders and submit a detailed report within a period of

one month.  However, pending such enquiry, he ordered that

the authorization in favour of the petitioner to run the Fair

Price Shop be placed under suspension.  


6.              Feeling   aggrieved   by   the   said   suspension   order,

the   petitioner   preferred   a   revision   before   the   Deputy

Commissioner (Supply), Amravati Division at Amravati since

the   said   authority   is   having   revisional   powers.     The   said

revision   was   filed   under   Clause   24   of   the   Maharashtra

Essential Commodities (Regulations and Distribution) Order,

1975.     The   said   revision   was   registered   as   CSS

17/Wadegaon/2017-2018.     Along   with   the   revision,   the


                                                                           .....4/-


  ::: Uploaded on - 21/11/2017                       ::: Downloaded on - 22/11/2017 01:04:22 :::
 Judgment

                                                                   wp7252.17 28

                                     4

petitioner   has   also   filed   an   application   for   grant   of   Stay

staying  effect and   operation   of  order  passed   by the District

Supply   Officer   directing   to   place   authorization   of   the

petitioner under suspension.   The said Revisional Authority,

vide order dated 18.10.2017, after hearing learned counsel for

the petitioner, found that the petitioner has made out a prima

facie  case for grant of Stay.   Therefore, until further orders,

the Stay was granted meaning thereby that the order passed

by   the   District   Supply   Officer   placing   authorization   of   the

petitioner   under   suspension   is   stayed.     Consequently,   the

petitioner   continued   his   activity   of   running   the   Fair   Price

Shop  at village Wadegaon, Taluka Balapur, District Akola.


7.              The revision was finally decided by the Revisional

Authority   on   10.11.2017.     The   Revisional   Authority   i.e.   the

Deputy   Commissioner   (Supply),   Amravati   Division   at

Amravati   partly   allowed   the   revision   filed   on   behalf   of   the

petitioner.     By   partly   allowing   the   revision,   the   Revisional


                                                                          .....5/-


  ::: Uploaded on - 21/11/2017                      ::: Downloaded on - 22/11/2017 01:04:22 :::
 Judgment

                                                                   wp7252.17 28

                                      5

Authority   remanded   the   matter   back   to  the   District   Supply

Officer   to   decide   the   same   afresh   in   accordance   with   law

within   a  period   of  two   months.     However,   while  remanding

the matter back, the Revisional Authority revoked the order

of Stay granted by the said Revisional Authority on 18.10.2017.


8.              The present writ petition is filed against the said

revocation of the Stay ordered on 18.10.2017.


9.              Once   the   Revisional   Authority   on   18.10.2017   has

passed the order of granting Stay to the order passed by the

District Supply Officer placing authorization of the petitioner

under  suspension  since   the Revisional  Authority  found  that

there   are   reasons   for   granting   the   Stay   and   when   the

Revisional   Court   partly   allowed   the   revision   and   remanded

the   matter   back   to   the   District   Supply   Officer   for   decision

afresh, in my view, the Revisional Authority has committed a

serious error in directing that the Stay order granted is not



                                                                          .....6/-


  ::: Uploaded on - 21/11/2017                      ::: Downloaded on - 22/11/2017 01:04:22 :::
 Judgment

                                                                  wp7252.17 28

                                    6

having effect.  


10.            Once the matter is remanded back to the District

Supply Officer, it is expected from the District Supply Officer

to pass the order in accordance with law.  Therefore, without

there   being   anything   against   the   petitioner,   the   Revisional

Authority has committed a mistake that the order passed by

the   District   Supply   Officer   directing   to   place   authorization

under suspension shall come into operation.  Such is unknown

to the settled principles of law.


11.            In that view of the matter, this  Court passes  the

following order:


                                ORDER

i) The writ petition is allowed.

ii) Order dated 10.11.2017 passed under Clause 24 of the Maharashtra Essential Commodities (Regulations and Distribution) Order, 1975 by the .....7/-

::: Uploaded on - 21/11/2017 ::: Downloaded on - 22/11/2017 01:04:22 ::: Judgment wp7252.17 28 7 Deputy Commissioner (Supply), Amravati Division at Amravati is hereby set aside to the extent it is challenged.

iii) It is made clear that pending proceedings before the District Supply Officer, the petitioner will be able to operate his authorization by running the Fair Price Shop at village Wadegaon, Taluka Balapur, District Akola.

iv) The District Supply Officer is directed to decide the proceedings within a period of two months as ordered by the Revisional Authority. The Rule is made absolute in aforesaid terms. However, there shall be no order as to costs.

JUDGE !! BRW !! ...../-

::: Uploaded on - 21/11/2017 ::: Downloaded on - 22/11/2017 01:04:22 :::