Allahabad High Court
Javed Ahmad vs Commissioner Ayodhya Division Ayodhya ... on 14 May, 2024
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD, LUCKNOW BENCH
?Neutral Citation No. - 2024:AHC-LKO:36977
Court No. - 19
Case :- WRIT - C No. - 3790 of 2024
Petitioner :- Javed Ahmad
Respondent :- Commissioner Ayodhya Division Ayodhya And 3 Others
Counsel for Petitioner :- Shailesh Kumar Pathak,Anju Tripathi,Ashutosh Tiwari,Saurabh Pathak
Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.,Ram Raj
Hon'ble Subhash Vidyarthi,J.
1. Heard Sri Shailesh Kumar Pathak, the learned counsel for the petitioner, Sri Abhishek Pandey, the learned Additional Chief Standing Counsel for respondent No. 1 and 2, Sri Rishabh Raj, learned counsel for respondent No. 3- Zila Panchayat, Sultanpur and No. 4- Uppar Mukhya Adhikari, Zila Panchayat, Sultanpur and perused the record.
2. By means of the writ petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India the petitioner has challenged the validity of an order dated 29.06.2021 passed by the Uppar Mukhya Adkhikari, Zila Panchayat, Sultanpur, rejecting an application for renewal of license to hold cattle market. The petitioner has also challenged the validity of an order dated 03.08.2023 passed by the Commissioner Ayodhya Division, Ayodhya, dismissing an appeal filed by the petitioner against the aforesaid order dated 29.06.2021.
3. Briefly stated, the facts pleaded in the writ petition are that the petitioner's father Late Mohd. Jaliesh Ahmad had been granted a license by Zila Panchayat, Sultanpur for running a cattle market over a Plot No. 419 in Village Lolepur, Pargana Meeranpur, Tehsil Sadar, District Sultanpur in the year 2010. The petitioner's father continued to hold the license up to year 2013 and thereafter he had surrendered the license. The petitioner's father died on 06.09.2020. On 22.02.2021, the petitioner had applied for renewal of the license granted to his father, in his favour and he claims to have deposited the dues of his father.
4. The aforesaid application was rejected by the Uppar Mukhya Adhihkari on the ground that the petitioner is not the sole owner of the land in question, a cattle market is already running at a distance of 1.9 Km from the land in question whereas "???? ????????? ?? ??????? ????????? ??? ???? ???? ??? ????, ??? ?????, ???????? ?????????, ?????? ????? ????? ??? ????? ?? ????????? ??? ???????? ???? ?? ??????????" provides that no cattle market runs within a radius of 5 Km of any other cattle market.
5. The petitioner filed an appeal against the rejection order dated 29.06.2021, which has been dismissed by the Commissioner Ayodhya Division, Ayodhya by means of an order dated 03.08.2023. The Appellate Authority has recorded in the impugned order dated 03.08.2023 that the petitioner's father Late Mohd. Jaliesh was granted a license to run cattle market over Plot No. 419 in the year 2010, which continued till 2013. The petitioner's father died on 16.09.2020 and neither he deposited the license fee during the period of 2013 -20 nor did he run the cattle market.
6. It is also recorded in the appellate order that an inspection of the proposed site of market was conducted by the Senior Revenue Inspector of Zila Panchyat and he submitted a report that the site is situated besides Faizabad- Sultanpur main road but upon making inquiries from some local persons it came to his knowledge that there were several share holders of the land in question. Moreover, another cattle market exists at a distance of 1.9 Km from the land in question. There were two thatched roofs and four charahi for cattle on the land and the rest of the land was lying vacant. There was no facility for drinking water for the cattle, facility for sitting of cattle traders, toilet etc. There was no boundary to secure the cattle and no platform for loading and unloading of the cattle in vehicles.
7. The Appellate Authority found that the petitioner's application had rightly been rejected for taking into consideration the aforesaid facts.
8. While assailing the validity of the aforesaid order, the learned counsel for the petitioner relied upon the decision rendered by the Division Bench of this Court in Dambar Singh Vs. Adhykasha Jiladhikari, Zila Prishad, Aligarh and others, 1985 UPLBEC 52 (Civil Misc. Writ Petition No. 12053 of 1984). The aforesaid writ petition had been filed challenging an order cancelling a license granted to the petitioner to hold cattle market on his own land, pursuant to a representation made by the Gaon Sabha, Pinjari Nagri that it also wanted to run a cattle market. The Licensing Officer found that the petitioner was holding a market on his own land for the last 10-12 years. However, it will not be in public interest to allow any individual to hold any cattle market on his own land within the jurisdiction of Gaon Sabha. This Court held that the Licensing Officer had a discretion to earmark any particular day for holding of a cattle market by either of the two parties.
9. The aforesaid judgment is not relevant for adjudication of the present case, where the petitioner had applied for renewal of the license granted to his father in the year 2010, which had been surrendered by his father in the year 2013 and the petitioner's father had not sought grant/renewal of the license during his lifetime till the year 2020. It is only after the death of the petitioner's father, that he has applied for renewal of the license whereas there is no provision for renewal of a license in favour of heirs of the licensee after the death of the licensee. However, the petitioner's father was not a licensee at the time of his death, as he had surrendered the license seven years prior to his death. Therefore, the petitioner has no right to seek renewal of the license and his application for renewal of the license has rightly been rejected.
10. The learned counsel for the respondent- Zila Panchayat had submitted that in case the petitioner submits an application for grant of a fresh license and he fulfills all the requisite legal conditions, a suitable decision will be taken on his application in accordance with the law.
11. In view of the aforesaid observations, the writ petition stands disposed of.
(Subhash Vidyarthi,J.)
Order Date :- 14.5.2024
Preeti.
