Jila Mahila Bahuuddeshiya Avom ... vs The State Of Madhya Pradesh
2023 Latest Caselaw 6112 MP

                                                            1
                           IN     THE      HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH
                                                AT JABALPUR
                                                      BEFORE
                                        HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE VISHAL MISHRA
                                                ON THE 17 th OF APRIL, 2023
                                             WRIT PETITION No. 16959 of 2020

                          BETWEEN:-
                          JILA MAHILA BAHUUDDESHIYA AVOM AUDYOGIK
                          SAHAKARI SAMITI MYDT NIWADI THROUGH THE
                          PRESIDENT SAROJ VARMA, AGED ABOUT 43 YEAR W/O
                          SHRI RAMPAL VARMA, R/O NAYKO KA MOHALLA
                          TEHSIL AND DISTRICT TIKAMGARH (MADHYA
                          PRADESH)

                                                                                         .....PETITIONER
                          (BY SHRI ANIL LALA - ADVOCATE)

                          AND
                          1.    THE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH THR THR
                                SECRETARY FOOD    CIVIL SUPPLIES AND
                                CONSUMER PROTECTION DEPTT. MANTRALAY,
                                VALLABH BHAVAN, BHOPAL (MADHYA PRADESH)

                          2.    SUB DIVISIONAL OFFICER (REVENUE), SUB
                                DIVISION NIWADI, DISTRICT NIWADI (MADHYA
                                PRADESH)

                          3.    JUNIOR SUPPLY OFFICER NIWADI, DISTRICT
                                NIWADI (MADHYA PRADESH)

                                                                                       .....RESPONDENTS
                          (BY SHRI SACHIN JAIN - PANEL LAWYER)

                                This petition coming on for admission this day, th e court passed the
                          following:
                                                             ORDER

This petition has been filed by the petitioner/Society under Article 226 of the Constitution of India challenging the order dated 04.09.2020 (Annexure-P/2) passed by the respondent No.2 - Sub Divisional Officer (Revenue), Niwadi Signature Not Verified Signed by: SUSHEEL KUMAR JHARIYA Signing time: 4/20/2023 11:09:52 AM

whereby license of the petitioner/society to run a fair price shop has been suspended and it has been attached to Prathmik Krishi Sakha Sahkari Samity Maryadit Tareevarkalan.

Counsel for the petitioner submits that case of the petitioner is squarely covered by an order passed by the Coordinate Bench of this Court in the case of Maa Durga Bahuddeshiya Sahakari Samity Maryadit Bihta Vs. The State of Madhya Pradesh and others passed in W.P. No.20560 of 2019 dated 10.01.2020 wherein relying upon the several decisions rendered by the Supreme Court on the issue in question, the Coordinate Bench has held as under:

"10. So far as the contention raised by the learned counsel for the respondents/State is concerned that if the Manager and the Salesman of the Society have been impleaded and they have been heard then it is deemed that the Society has also been heard, I am not convinced with this contention because the Society has its own identity and the President of the Society in such an event is required to have been heard but not the Manager and the Salesman because they are the employees of the Society and they have no control over the Society.

11. Thus, the order impugned is apparently illegal and has been passed without following the principle of natural justice and without giving any opportunity of hearing to the petitioner. Therefore, the same is not sustainable in the eyes of law and is hereby set aside. However, the respondents are at liberty to initiate proceedings against the petitioner/Society by giving them proper opportunity of hearing and after following the proper procedure of law. 1 2 . Accordingly, the petition filed by the petitioner is allowed and disposed of. However, it is made clear that the order impugned is being set aside only to the extent of the petitioner but not to the extent of the Manager and the Salesman of the Society who have been provided proper opportunity of hearing."

Signature Not Verified Signed by: SUSHEEL KUMAR JHARIYA Signing time: 4/20/2023 11:09:52 AM

Learned counsel for the State could not dispute the aforesaid judgment passed by the Coordinate Bench of this Court.

Considering the overall facts and circumstances of the case and taking note of the order passed by the Coordinate Bench of this Court in the case of M a a Durga Bahuddeshiya Sahakari Samity Maryadit Bihta (supra), which applies mutatis mutandis to the facts of the present case, this petition is allowed in similar terms. The impugned order dated 04.09.2020 (Annexure P/2) is hereby quashed.

Certified copy as per rules.

(VISHAL MISHRA) JUDGE sj

Signature Not Verified Signed by: SUSHEEL KUMAR JHARIYA Signing time: 4/20/2023 11:09:52 AM