Kamlesh Dangi vs The State Of Rajasthan
2021 Latest Caselaw 10768 Raj

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT JODHPUR

S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 8824/2021

1. Kamlesh Dangi S/o Devi Lal Dangi, Aged About 27 Years, R/o Gram Panchayat Balicha, P. S. Lasadiya, District Udaipur.

2. Devi Lal Dangi S/o Amaraji Dangi, Aged About 40 Years, R/o Gram Panchayat Balicha, P. S. Lasadiya, District Udaipur.

3. Ruplal Ji Dangi S/o Vardaji Dangi, Aged About 55 Years, R/o Gram Panchayat Balicha, P. S. Lasadiya, District Udaipur.

4. Nana Lal Meena S/o Shanker Lal Meena, Aged About 40 Years, R/o Shojh Ji Ka Guda, P. S. Lasadiya, District Udaipur.

5. Varda Dangi S/o Dhana Dangi, Aged About 45 Years, R/o Gram Panchayat Balicha, P. S. Lasadiya, District Udaipur.

6. Jai Singh Gurjar S/o Nanda Gurjar, Aged About 60 Years, R/o Gurjaro Ka Guda, Gram Panchayat Balicha, P. S. Lasadiya, District Udaipur.

7. Heera Lal Gurjar S/o Nanda Gurjar, Aged About 35 Years, R/o Gurjaro Ka Guda, Gram Panchayat Balicha, P. S. Lasadiya, District Udaipur.

8. Smt. Hudi Bai W/o Bhera Gurjar, Aged About 65 Years, R/o Gurjaro Ka Guda, Gram Panchayat Balicha, P. S. Lasadiya, District Udaipur.

----Petitioners Versus

1. The State Of Rajasthan, Through Principal Secretary, Department Of Food, Supplies And Distribution, Government Of Rajasthan, Jaipur.

2. The District Collector, Udaipur.

3. The District Supply Officer, District Udaipur.

4. The Sub Divisional Officer, Lasadiya, District Udaipur.

5. The Tehsildar, Lasadiya, District Udaipur.

6. The Enforcement Officer, Lasadiya, Udaipur.

                                          (2 of 3)                    [CW-8824/2021]


7.     Vardi   Chand     Dangi       S/o     Bheraji       Danjgi,    R/o   Gram

Panchayat Balicha, P. S. Lasadiya, District Udaipur.

----Respondents

For Petitioner(s) : Ms. Deepika Purohit

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VIJAY BISHNOI

Judgment / Order

14/07/2021

This writ petition has been preferred on behalf of the

petitioners being aggrieved with the impugned order

dated 21.6.2021 whereby, the Distt. Supply Officer-II,

Udaipur has restored the dealership of the respondent

No.7 of his fair price shop.

The Distt. Supply Officer-II, Udaipur vide aforesaid

order has restored the dealership of the respondent No.7

of his fair price shop for the reason that the said

dealership was suspended on 23.7.2020, however, as per

the provisions of Rajasthan Foodgrains & Other Essential

Articles (Regulation of Distribution) Order, 1976 (for short

'the Order of 1976'), suspension of dealership of a fair

price shop can not be more than 90 days.

Having heard learned counsel for the petitioners and

after going through the material available on record, this

Court is of the opinion that sub-clause (2) of Clause (8)

(3 of 3) [CW-8824/2021]

of the Order of 1976 has specifically provided that

authorisation of a fair price shop can be suspended for a

period not exceeding 90 days.

Hence, I do not find any illegality in the impugned

order dated 21.6.2021 passed by the Distt. Supply

Officer-II, Udaipur.

Accordingly, this writ petition is dismissed. Stay

petition is also dismissed.

(VIJAY BISHNOI),J

27-msrathore/-

Powered by TCPDF (www.tcpdf.org)