Mahalaxmi Mahila Bachat Gat ... vs Honble Minister Food Civil Supply ...
2017 Latest Caselaw 6986 Bom

                                                                                  1                                                                wp3265.16

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



                                                       WRIT PETITION NO.3265/2016

Mahalaxmi Mahila Bachat Gut, Anakwadi, 
through its President, Sau Sushila Santosh
Jumade, aged about 35 Yrs., Occu. Household, 
R/o Anakwadi, Tq. Bhatkuli, Distt. Amravati.                                                                                                                    ..Petitioner.

                          ..Vs..

1.             Hon'ble Minister, 
               Food, Civil Supply & Consumer Protection
               Department, Mantralaya, Mumbai. 

2.             Deputy Commissioner,
               Food & Civil Supply, Amravati Division,
               Amravati. 

3.             District Supply Officer, 
               Tq. & Distt. Amravati. 

4.             Jay Bhavani Mahila Bachat Gut,  Anakwadi, 
               through its President Smt. Yogita Sanjay Koltake, 
               aged about 35 Yrs., Occu. Household,
               R/o Anakwadi, Tq. Bhatkuli, Distt. Amravati.                 ..Respondents.
  - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - 
              Shri A.V. Gawande, Advocate for the petitioner. 
              Shri A.R. Chutke, A.G.P. for respondent Nos.1 to 3. 
              Shri V.A. Kathole, Advocate for respondent No.4.
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - 




                                                                 CORAM :  S.C. GUPTE, J.

                                                                 DATE  :     11.9.2017.




ORAL JUDGMENT

                          Heard learned counsel for the parties.




                                            2                                                                wp3265.16

2. Rule. Taken up for hearing forthwith by consent of counsel.

3. The subject matter of the present petition is a revisional order

passed by the Hon'ble Minister of Food, Civil Supply and Consumer Protection.

By the impugned order, the Hon'ble Minister allowed the revision application

and remanded the matter of allocation of fair price shop to the Deputy

Commissioner for a fresh decision in accordance with law.

4. On 21st January, 2015 respondent No.3 - District Supply Officer

issued a proclamation inviting applications from Mahila Bachat Guts of village

Kanakwadi for allocating a new fair price shop in the village. Four bachat guts

applied for allotment of the fair price shop. All four having satisfied the

conditions of the proclamation, including considerations of seniority and

merits, the District Supply Officer, Amravati sent all four applications to the

Gramsabha of Women for the requisite resolution. At that stage, two

applicants withdrew their applications for allotment of fair price shop. The

voting was held between remaining two applicants, being the petitioner and

respondent No.4 herein. Sixty votes were cast in favour of the petitioner,

whereas fifty nine were cast in favour of the respondent. In accordance with

the resolution of Gramsabha, the District Supply Officer, by his order dated 1 st

September, 2015, allotted the fair price shop to the petitioner. This order was

challenged by respondent No.4 before the Deputy Commissioner (Supply) in

3 wp3265.16

revision. By his order dated 1st December, 2015, the Deputy Commissioner

rejected the application of respondent No.4 and confirmed the order of the

District Supply Officer. In pursuance of the revisional order of the Deputy

Commissioner, the shop was allotted to the petitioner, who started running the

fair price shop in the village. The matter was thereafter carried further by

respondent No.4 in a revision before the Hon'ble Minister. By his order dated

22nd April, 2016, the Hon'ble Minister rejected the revision application of

respondent No.4. The Hon'ble Minister, however, cancelled the orders of both

Deputy Commissioner (Supply) dated 1st September, 2015 and the District

Supply Officer dated 1st December, 2015 and directed the Deputy

Commissioner (Supply) to examine the matter afresh in accordance with merits

and thereafter to re-submit the resolution for voting. This order is challenged

in the present petition.

5. Both the authorities below, namely, the District Supply Officer and

the Deputy Commissioner (Supply), have proceeded on the footing that all four

applications received for allotment of fair price shop satisfied the criteria of

seniority as well as merits; the applications were, accordingly, submitted to the

Gramsabha for recommendation; and that by a majority of votes (60 against

59), Mahila Gramsabha recommended the petitioner for allotment of fair price

shop. Accordingly, both authorities accepted the petitioner's application for

allotment of fair price shop. In the impugned order, the Hon'ble Minister has

4 wp3265.16

not questioned any of these findings of the authorities below. The Hon'ble

Minister has proceeded on the footing that the applications, after having found

them to be eligible on the criteria of both seniority and merits, were sent by the

District Supply Officer to Mahila Gramsabha for the requisite resolution and

that after voting was duly conducted for recommendation of the Gramsabha,

the petitioner herein got 60 votes against 59 votes secured by respondent No.4.

And yet the orders of the authorities below were set aside, despite, strangely,

having rejected the revision application, simply on the following three

grounds:

(i) As much as the petitioner, respondent No.4 also satisfied the conditions for allotment of fair price shop,

(ii) The difference of votes secured by the petitioner and respondent No.4 was only of one vote, and

(iii) There is no indication as to what criteria were applied for determining the priority of the applicants and this has caused confusion.

6. None of the three grounds considered by the Hon'ble Minister has

any merit. The voting as between the petitioner and respondent No.4 was

taken, in the first place, because both equally satisfied the criteria of seniority

and merits. The first ground, accordingly, makes no sense. Secondly, the

difference of one vote is perfectly good to win the recommendation of the

Gramsabha. There is no observation in the impugned order of the Hon'ble

Minister that the votes either were wrongly counted or that there was some

5 wp3265.16

confusion or impropriety in the voting process. If that is so, one fails to

understand why the matter needs to be sent back for a fresh resolution of the

Gramsabha for the reason of difference of one vote. Thirdly, the observations

concerning the criteria applied for determining priority are neither here nor

there. After having accepted the case of the parties that both were equally

eligible on the criteria of seniority and merits, the Hon'ble Minister could not

have set aside the impugned order and remanded the matter simply because

the criteria applied were not in fact indicated in the impugned order.

Whatever be the criteria, the equal eligibility of both the petitioner and

respondent No.4 is not a matter of dispute. The impugned order of the Hon'ble

Minister, accordingly, cannot be sustained.

Rule is accordingly made absolute by quashing and setting aside the

impugned order of the Hon'ble Minister and restoring the orders of the District

Supply Officer dated 1st September, 2015 and the Deputy Commissioner

(Supply) dated 1st December, 2015. In the circumstances of the case, the

parties shall bear their own costs.

JUDGE

Tambaskar.