HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN
BENCH AT JAIPUR
S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 2083/2017
1. Ramniwas S/o Jawahar Singh, R/o-Chekora, Post-
Chekora, Roopwas Bharatpur.
2. Vikram Singh S/o Rajendra Singh, R/o-Chekora, Post-
Chekora, Roopwas Bharatpur.
3. Prahlad Singh S/o Ramveer Singh, R/o-Chekora, Post-
Chekora, Roopwas Bharatpur.
4. Harvendra Singh S/o Omveer Singh, R/o-Chekora, Post-
Chekora, Roopwas Bharatpur.
5. Shaymbraj Singh S/o Bahadur Singh, R/o-Chekora, Post-
Chekora, Roopwas Bharatpur.
6. Ramesh Chand Rajawat S/o Bhagwan Singh, R/o-
Chekora, Post-Chekora, Roopwas Bharatpur.
----Petitioners
Versus
1. State Of Rajasthan, Through Principal Secretary, Food
And Supply Department.
2. District Collector, Bharatpur.
3. District Supply Officer I, Bharatpur.
4. Dashrath Singh S/o Amar Singh, R/o-Chekora, Post-
Chekora, Roopwas Bharatpur.
----Respondents
For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Manish Tailer for Mr. Rahul Kamwar Abhisar For Respondent(s) : Mr. Bharat Singh Gurjar, Dy.G.C.
Mr. Manoj Kumar Bhardwaj HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJEEV PRAKASH SHARMA Order 24/08/2021 The petitioners have preferred this writ petition stating that they are the residents of village Chekora, Tehsil Roopwas, District Bharatpur and are regular consumers/beneficiaries of foodgrains (Downloaded on 25/08/2021 at 10:13:20 PM) (2 of 3) [CW-2083/2017] and commodities distributed by the fair price shops and have therefore a locus to challenge the order passed by the District Collector deciding the appeal filed by the respondents as against the order of the District Supply Officer, Bharatpur whereby the District Collector has remanded the matter back to the District Supply Officer with direction to pass a fresh judgment after recording the statement of witnesses and after examining the case accordingly.
A query was raised to the learned counsel to show as to how the petitioners can be said to be aggrieved of such an order which admittedly allows the witnesses to be examined which may also include a complainant.
Learned counsel submits that the petitioners are local persons interested in supply of foodgrains and the fair price shops run by the respondent was not in confirmity with the norms laid down for the purpose and therefore he should not be allowed to run the fair price shops.
I have considered the submissions.
A complainant has no locus to challenge the order of suspension of fair price shop or the cancellation of such a license. Since it is a license issued by the State Government, it is the State Authorities who have to see that the conditions laid down in the license are followed. The provisions are already available under the Rajasthan Foodgrains & Other Essential Articles (Regulation of Distribution) Order 1976. Provision of appeal is also provided under Para 22 of the said Standing Order and the Collector is empowered to pass an order. Thus, it cannot be said that the order has been passed without an authority. From the nature of (Downloaded on 25/08/2021 at 10:13:20 PM) (3 of 3) [CW-2083/2017] the order, this Court finds that the order does not warrant any interference as it only seeks to comply with the principles of Natural Justice and giving fair opportunity of hearing to either parties.
The petitioners have also not placed on record any document to show that they were getting ration from the concerned fair price shops.
A wholly frivolous litigation has been initiated through this petitioner and the same is accordingly dismissed. All pending applications also stand dismissed.
(SANJEEV PRAKASH SHARMA),J NITIN/20 (Downloaded on 25/08/2021 at 10:13:20 PM) Powered by TCPDF (www.tcpdf.org)