Jammu & Kashmir High Court - Srinagar Bench
Abdul Rashid Khan & Ors vs Union Territory Of Jk & Ors on 24 May, 2021
Serial No. 343
Supplementary-1 List
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JAMMU AND KASHMIR
AT SRINAGAR
WP(C) No. 965/2021
CM Nos. 3124/2021 & 3126/2021
Dated: 24th of May, 2021.
Abdul Rashid Khan & Ors.
..... Petitioner(s)
Through: -
Mr Bhat Fayaz Ahmad, Advocate.
V/s
Union Territory of JK & Ors.
..... Respondent(s)
Through: -
Mr Feroz Ahmad Sheikh, Dy. AG.
CORAM:
Hon'ble Mr Justice Ali Mohammad Magrey, Judge.
(JUDGMENT)
(Oral:)
01. By medium of the instant Petition filed under Article 226 of the
Constitution of India, the Petitioners have knocked at the portals of this
Court in granting them the following relief(s):
"(a) Writ of Certiorari seeking quashment of order No.
DFCS&CAK/ADM/B-X-52/Bla dated 20.04.2021 to the extent
of directing the respondent No.4 to shift the Fair Price shop
located in the house of village Numberdar to some other
accommodation;
(b) Writ of Mandamus commanding upon the
respondents to explain the reasons for incorporating the said
condition in the order impugned while reinstating the license of
the licensee;
(c) Writ of Mandamus commanding upon the
respondents to ensure that the inhabitants of the area are not
subjected to any sort of inconvenience, as the Fair Price Shop
WP(C) No. 965/2021;
CM Nos. 3124/2021 & 3126/2021
is centrally located which is convenient to the entire village,
further direct the respondents to shift their Fair Price Shop at
the behest of the license holder or any political intervention;
and
(d) Any other writ, order or direction which this Hon'ble
court may deem fit and proper in the given circumstances of
this case may also be issued in favour of the petitioners and
against the respondents; the same would be in consonance with
law and justice."
02. The Petitioners claim to be the residents of Babagund, Pattan,
District Baramulla and having been authorized by the inhabitants of the said
area to file the Petition on hand. It is stated that a complaint came to be filed
against the Fair Price Shop License holder, namely, Mr Abdul Hamid Mir,
by the inhabitants of the area on the ground of misappropriation of food
grains meant for the rationees of Babagund, Masooma, Pattan, resulting in
suspension of the license of the Fair Price Shop holder with immediate effect
vide Order No. 43-DFCS&CAK of 2021 dated 1st of March, 2021. It is
pleaded that, thereafter, an enquiry was got conducted into the matter which
culminated with the issuance of the Order impugned dated 20 th of April,
2021, in terms whereof the Fair Price Shop dealership license of the
aforesaid person stands restored with further direction to the Assistant
Director, Baramulla to shift the said Fair Price Shop located in the house of
village Numberdar to some other accommodation which is mutually and
unanimously agreed by the rationees of the area. It is this Order that has
been assailed by the Petitioners through the medium of the instant Petition.
WP(C) No. 965/2021;
CM Nos. 3124/2021 & 3126/2021
03. Mr Bhat Fayaz Ahmad, the learned counsel appearing for the
Petitioners, submitted that the impugned Order issued by the Respondents
has the effect of imposing punishment upon the inhabitants of the area
concerned inasmuch as the ration depo in question was centrally located as
per the convenience of all the rationees of the area, but the Respondents,
after being annoyed with the complaints so filed by the inhabitants of the
area and with complete non-application of mind, have proposed shifting of
the same. It is pleaded that the aim and object of the inhabitants in
approaching the Respondents by way of the aforesaid complaints/
representations was only to streamline the entire process of distribution of
ration in accordance with the relevant Government policy in vogue and not
the suspension or any other penal action against the Fair Price Shop.
04. Objections stand filed on behalf of the Respondents, resisting
and controverting the averments made by the Petitioners in their Petition. It
is submitted that no right of the Petitioners stands violated with the issuance
of the Order impugned and that the same has been issued after conducting
proper enquiry into the matter in tune with the mandate of the scheme
formulated by the Government and keeping in view the public interest
involved.
05. Heard learned counsel for the parties, perused the pleadings on
record and considered the matter.
WP(C) No. 965/2021;
CM Nos. 3124/2021 & 3126/2021
06. When this matter was taken up for consideration on 19th of
May, 2021, the Court, after hearing the learned counsel for the parties,
passed an ad-interim Order, thereby directing that the Fair Price Shop in
question shall not be shifted till the next date of hearing, viz. today.
07. After hearing the learned counsel for the parties, coupled with a
perusal of the pleadings on record, the Court is of the considered view that
the Order impugned has been issued by the Respondents on the basis of the
enquiry conducted into the matter pursuant to the complaints filed by the
inhabitants of the area/ Petitioners herein regarding distribution of ration by
the Fair Price Shop in question. The Order does not envisage the shifting of
the Fair Price Shop from the area nor does it aim to deprive any rationee of
the area from receiving ration from the said Shop. Besides, it is clearly
provided in the Order impugned that the Assistant Director, Baramulla shall
shift the Fair Price Shop to some other accommodation with mutual and
unanimous agreement of the rationees of the area which, in ordinary sense,
should have taken care of the grievance so projected by the Petitioners in
this Petition. In such circumstances, no fault can be attributed to the action
of the Respondents as taken in terms of the impugned Order pursuant to the
complaints filed by the inhabitants of the area.
08. Given the above position, I do not find any merit in the instant
petition. It entails dismissal and is hereby dismissed along with all pending
WP(C) No. 965/2021;
CM Nos. 3124/2021 & 3126/2021
CMs therewith. Interim directions, if any, subsisting as on date shall stand
vacated.
09. Parties are, in the attending facts and circumstances of the case,
left free to bear their own costs.
(Ali Mohammad Magrey)
Judge
SRINAGAR
May 24th, 2021
"TAHIR"
i. Whether the Judgment is reportable? Yes/ No.
ii. Whether the Judgment is speaking? Yes/ No.
TAHIR MANZOOR BHAT
2021.05.25 09:56
I attest to the accuracy and
integrity of this document
